Site Suitability Report S54SK: King's Stairs Gardens

Autumn 2011
Site suitability report S54SK

Kings Stairs Gardens
Please note: Further details are provided in the Final Report on Site Selection Process (doc ref: 7.05) that can be found on the Thames Tideway Tunnel section of the Planning Inspectorates web site.
110-RG-PNC-S54SK-000629 | Autumn 2011

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens
Thames Tunnel Site suitability report S54SK

List of contents
Page number
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Purpose and structure of the report ......................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................. 1 Consultation............................................................................................. 2 Site and surroundings .............................................................................. 2 Type of site .............................................................................................. 4
Site information ................................................................................................ 2 2.1 2.2
3 4
Proposed use of site construction phase ................................................... 4 Proposed use of site operational phase ..................................................... 6 4.1 4.2 Introduction .............................................................................................. 6 Restoration and after-use ........................................................................ 7 Access ..................................................................................................... 7 Construction works considerations .......................................................... 8 Permanent works considerations............................................................. 8 Health and safety..................................................................................... 9 Introduction .............................................................................................. 9 Planning applications and permissions.................................................... 9 Planning context ...................................................................................... 9 Planning comments ............................................................................... 11 Introduction ............................................................................................ 13 Transport ............................................................................................... 13 Archaeology........................................................................................... 14 Built heritage and townscape................................................................. 14 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water ............................. 15 Ecology .................................................................................................. 16 Flood risk ............................................................................................... 16 Air quality ............................................................................................... 17
Engineering assessment ................................................................................. 7 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4
Planning assessment ...................................................................................... 9 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4
Environmental appraisal ............................................................................... 13 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8
7.9 7.10 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 9 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 10 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7
Noise ..................................................................................................... 17 Land quality ........................................................................................... 18 Introduction ............................................................................................ 18 Socio-economic profile .......................................................................... 19 Issues and impacts ................................................................................ 19 Introduction ............................................................................................ 22 Crown land and special land comments ................................................ 22 Land to be acquired ............................................................................... 23 Property valuation comments ................................................................ 23 Disturbance compensation comments................................................... 24 Discretionary purchase costs comments ............................................... 25 Offsite statutory compensation comments ............................................. 25 Site acquisition cost assessment ........................................................... 25 Introduction ............................................................................................ 25 Engineering ........................................................................................... 25 Planning................................................................................................. 26 Environment .......................................................................................... 27 Socio-economic and community ............................................................ 28 Property ................................................................................................. 29 Next steps in the site selection process................................................. 30
Socio-economic and community assessment............................................. 18
Property assessment ..................................................................................... 22
Site conclusions by discipline ...................................................................... 25
Appendices ............................................................................................................. 33 Appendix 1 Sources of information Appendix 2 Site location plan Appendix 3 Planning and environment plans Appendix 4 Photographs of the site and surroundings Appendix 5 Transport plan Appendix 6 Services and geology plan Appendix 7 Construction phase layout Appendix 8 Operational phase layout Appendix 9 Environmental appraisal tables
ii
List of tables
Page number
Table 3.1 Construction phase data ............................................................................ 5 Table 4.1 Operational phase data ............................................................................. 7
List of abbreviations AOD BAP BT CPO CSO DLR EA GLA HGV LNR LPA LU m MOL ONS ORN PLA POS PTAL SAM SINC SNCI SSR SSSI SUDS TfL TD above Ordnance Datum biodiversity action plan British Telecom compulsory purchase order combined sewer overflow Docklands Light Railway Environment Agency Greater London Authority heavy goods vehicle local nature reserve local planning authority London Underground metre/metres Metropolitan Open Land Office of National Statistics Olympic Route Network Port of London Authority public open space public transport accessibility level scheduled ancient monument site of importance for nature conservation site(s) of nature conservation importance site suitability report site(s) of special scientific interest sustainable urban drainage systems Transport for London tunnel datum
iii
TLRN TPA UDP UXO
Transport for London Road Network Thames Policy Area unitary development plan unexploded ordnance
iv
1 1.1
1.1.1
Introduction Purpose and structure of the report

The Site selection methodology paper (May 2009 and revised August 2011) a outlines the process to be used to create the preferred list of main tunnel sites, and this process also applies to CSO sites. Paragraph 2.3.31 lists the type of general considerations that will be addressed in each site suitability report. Whether a consideration is relevant to the assessment of a site will depend on available information and professional judgement. This report was prepared through the assessment of information from the perspective of a number of technical disciplines: engineering, planning, environment, property and community. The reports have been prepared on the basis of the information listed in Appendix 1 and this level of information is considered to be appropriate to this stage of assessment. The Site selection background technical paper provides information on the requirements for different types of sites, their sizes and typical activities/ facilities within the sites. Each site suitability report considers a particular site on its own merits. In addition, an Engineering options report was produced, which relates to main tunnel and connection tunnel options. Information from both of these reports will feed into the technical assessment of how well the site may fit in with tunnel design options, ensuring combinations of sites spread across the length of the tunnel route provide a reasonable spatial distribution of sites (that will best assist with the construction of the tunnel, operation and maintenance). The outcomes are reported in the Phase two scheme development report.
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
1.2
1.2.1
Background
The process for selecting sites is set out in the Site selection methodology paper. All sites have previously passed through the following parts of Stage 1: Part 1A Creation of the long list of potential main tunnel (and CSO) sites Part 1B Creation of a short list of potential main tunnel (and CSO) sites o o o Table 2.2: Long list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites an assessment against set considerations and values Table 2.3: Draft short list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites assessment against a list of more detailed considerations Workshops to consider each site to arrive at a short list of sites.
The amendments made in August 2011 do not change the site selection methodology process. The amendments only related to the introduction of a second phase of consultation (paragraphs 2.3.13-2.4.15) and minor factual updates.
Page 1
Site suitability report S54SK 1.2.2 The final part of Stage 1 includes this report. The following is an overall summary of all elements that apply to all the sites on the final short list: Part 1C Creation of the preferred list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites site data, site visits, site suitability reports, engineering options report and optioneering workshops that are reported in the Phase two scheme development report.
1.2.3
The Site selection methodology paper also contains a provision for a back-check process in paragraph 2.5.6 that states: If any sites for any of the main tunnel sites or intermediate sites (or CSO site) are eliminated for any reason, if there are significant changes of circumstances in relation to existing sites or combinations of sites, if new or replacement sites are required or found or if the engineering design develops in unexpected ways then a targeted repeat of stages 1-3 will need to be undertaken in order to fill in any site gaps.
1.3
1.3.1
Consultation
Thames Waters approach to engagement and consultation for the Thames Tunnel project is outlined in the Statement of Community Consultation and the accompanying Community Consultation Strategy. Thames Water has engaged regularly with all potentially affected London local authorities, other stakeholders and interested parties on sites and the project. Phase one consultation has been completed for all the preferred and shortlisted sites along with the three main tunnel route options. The analysis of the consultation responses is set out in the Report on phase one consultation and Interim engagement report. Any relevant site comments were considered at the post phase one consultation optioneering workshops. The outcomes of these workshops are reported in the Phase two scheme development report. After the workshops, engagement on sites has continued with key stakeholders, and the engineering design for sites has also continued in parallel. In autumn 2011, phase two consultation will provide another opportunity for people to comment on sites.
1.3.2
2 2.1
2.1.1
Site information Site and surroundings

This section provides an overview of all the site information that will be used by one or more disciplines to assess the site in sections 3 to 9 of this report. Site S54SK is located within Kings Stairs Gardens, a public park within the London Borough of Southwark. A site location plan is attached as Appendix 2. Use of Kings Stairs Gardens as a main tunnel drive site would require most of the park to be used as a construction site. For a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site and one of the main tunnel reception/intermediate site options, only the northern part of
2.1.2
2.1.3
Page 2
Site suitability report S54SK the gardens would be required. For the other main tunnel reception/ intermediate option, only the south part of the gardens would be required for construction. 2.1.4 The gardens contain a well maintained childrens play area, established wooded areas (particularly around its perimeter), grassed areas, pedestrian paths and a second small play area in the southwest corner. There is a river walkway on the northern edge of the site which has undergone some environmental improvements, including street furniture and seating, public art and new paving. The southern end of the site fronts onto Jamaica Road and is not included within the proposed worksite area. The wider area is residential in character and Kings Stairs Gardens serves as a public amenity space within the neighbourhood. The western edge of the site is the amenity space of residential apartment blocks 1 to 24 Cathay House and 1 to 14 The Mission, both located on Cathay Street. On the north-eastern edge, after the river walkway, there is a terrace of residential properties, 1 to 14 Kings Stairs Close. These properties front onto the river and, to the rear, overlook the gardens. The eastern edge of the site is formed primarily by the rear of properties 32 to 62 Elephant Lane. Pilgrim House is located on the south-eastern edge of the site. The nearest residents are situated in Cathay House and Kings Stairs Close, approximately 10m from the proposed work area. To the southwest of the site lie St Peter and the Guardian Angels Roman Catholic Church and its presbytery. A convent is also situated in close proximity to the church. The Bosco Centre also occupies land to the southwest of the site, providing a day nursery, junior and senior youth clubs, and a college. The Angel Public House is situated northwest of the site, along the riverfront. It has a small beer garden on the east elevation, adjacent to a small seating area containing public art. The site is covered by various planning and environment designations in the London Borough of Southwark Core Strategy (2011) and saved policies in the Southwark Plan: the London Borough of Southwark Unitary Development Plan (2007). All the mapped designations, where data was available, are shown on the planning and environment plans in Appendix 3. Photographs of the site and surroundings, together with an aerial photograph of the site, are attached as Appendix 4. The site is 0.35km from Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) Jamaica Road (A200) and can be accessed via Paradise Street. The site is 1km from London Bridge Station, and London Underground station Bermondsey is less than 0.5km away. The site is adjacent to the river and is about 100m away from the Wilson moorings. There are no existing jetty/wharfage facilities serving this site. A number of preliminary transport plans for the site are attached as Appendix 5.
2.1.5
2.1.6
2.1.7
2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10 2.1.11
Page 3
Site suitability report S54SK 2.1.12 Third-party assets and significant utilities are listed below and are shown on the services and geology plan in Appendix 6: 2.1.13 River wall in the north River View Heights (eight-storey) and Tempus Wharf (five-storey) residential buildings outside the western edge of the site An 1143 x 762mm sewer runs in Fulford Street and west to east across the centre of the site A water main (size unknown) runs west to east and north to south across the site 1 Fulford Street, four-storey residential building on the western side of the site Pynfolds, five-storey buildings at the outside south-western edge of the site London Mission, seven-storey building at the outside western edge of the site City Business Centre at the outside south-western part of the site Prince's Tower at the outside north-eastern part of the site Playground in the middle of the site.
The locations of other third-party assets, such as BT and fibre optic communication cables, are to be confirmed by further studies and utility searches and may not be shown on the services and geology plan. Information on the geology specific to this site can be found within the services and geology plan, which is in Appendix 6. This plan shows that the shaft would be founded in the Chalk. It is understood that EDF is planning to build a cable tunnel through this site at some stage (Brunswick Wharf to Osborne Street EDF Tunnel). If this site is selected, there would be dialogue with EDF to consider matters if applicable, such as timing, engineering constraints, cumulative effects of the projects, potential for site sharing, etc.
2.1.14
2.1.15
2.2
2.2.1
Type of site
The site S54SK is being considered as: a main tunnel drive site a main tunnel reception/intermediate site north side of site a main tunnel reception/intermediate site south side of site a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site.
3
3.1.1
Proposed use of site construction phase

The proposed construction phase layouts for the main tunnel sites are located in Appendix 7 Construction phase layout, and are based on a preliminary assessment.
Page 4
Site suitability report S54SK 3.1.2 The construction phase layout drawings are illustrative and show: 3.1.3 the layout as a main tunnel drive site the layout as a reception/intermediate site north side of site the layout as a reception/intermediate site south side of site the layout as a reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site potential access points.
These drawings provide initial preliminary schematic layouts that have not been optimised. If the site proceeds to the next stage as a preferred site, construction phase layouts would be optimised to minimise impacts. Drawings of typical activities associated with the shaft construction phase are provided in Appendix 7. Potential above-ground construction features (dependent on shaft type) include: approximately 3m high hoarding around the site boundary welfare facilities, temporary structures, approximately 3m high grout plant, approximately 3m to 5m high, including silos mobile crane, approximately 30m high gantry crane, approximately 8m high.
3.1.4
3.1.5
Construction of the drive, intermediate (north side) and intermediate with connection tunnel drive options would require full-width closure of Fulford Street and provision of temporary access to 1 Fulford Street. A section of the Thames Path may also require diversion. Access to St Peters and Guardian Angels RC Church via Paradise Street would be maintained. Construction of the intermediate (south side) option would not affect either Fulford Street or Paradise Street as access would be from Brunel and Jamaica Roads. A preliminary assessment of the traffic management, which would be required for all options, is indicated in the temporary traffic management plan in Appendix 5. Preliminary data associated with the construction phase are provided in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 Construction phase data Main tunnel Main tunnel Main tunnel reception/ reception/ reception/ intermediate intermediate intermediate site with site (north site (south connection side) side) tunnel drive 4 to 5 years 12 hours Mon to Sat 4 to 5 years 12 hours Mon to Sat 4 to 5 years 24 hours Mon to Sun
3.1.6
Activity
Main tunnel drive site
Length of construction period Likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) Working days
6 to 7 years 24 hours Mon to Sun
Page 5
Site suitability report S54SK Main tunnel Main tunnel Main tunnel reception/ reception/ reception/ intermediate intermediate intermediate site with site (north site (south connection side) side) tunnel drive Road* Road* Road*
Activity
Main tunnel drive site
Primary means of transporting excavated material away from site Primary means of transporting materials to site
Barge
Road/Barge
Road*
Road*
Road*
* There may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport for this site.
4 4.1
4.1.1
Proposed use of site operational phase Introduction

The indicative operational phase layouts for the main sites are located in Appendix 8 Operational phase layout, and are based on a preliminary assessment. The generic elevations of structures shown on the operational phase layout are located in Appendix 8 and provide an illustration of typical examples of the permanent structures which are applicable to main tunnel sites. The underground infrastructure at this site would likely comprise a shaft. The above-ground infrastructure at this site would likely comprise a ventilation column and electrical kiosk. The top structure is envisaged to be finished at a level of 104.50m tunnel datum (TD) (4.5mAOD), and since the ground level at this site is 104mTD (4mAOD) in places, the top structure may be raised to approximately 0.5m above the current ground level. Existing undulation of the park ground levels would allow the top structure to be disguised by earth mounding where possible. For further information on the generic layout of this top structure, refer to Appendix 8. Hardstanding would be provided to the top structures. The site would be fenced. Preliminary data associated with the operational phase are provided in Table 4.1.
4.1.2
4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5
4.1.6 4.1.7
Page 6
Site suitability report S54SK Table 4.1 Operational phase data Level of inspections and maintenance and likely working hours, ie, (night/day/ weekend) frequency of visits No. of traffic movements One daytime visit every six months for electrical/instrument inspection. An additional one-week maintenance period for tunnel/shaft inspection required per ten years that could be night/day/weekend working. One van visit every six months. An additional one-week period of two to ten movements per day (estimated several vans and two cranes) every ten years.
4.2
4.2.1
Restoration and after-use

The portion of the site not occupied by the permanent works would be restored to its original condition on completion of the construction works. If any buildings were demolished, these would not be reinstated unless required.
5 5.1
5.1.1
Engineering assessment Access

This section should be read in conjunction with Section 7.2.
Road
5.1.2 5.1.3 The site would be 0.35km from TLRN Jamaica Road (A200) and could be accessed via Paradise Street. For construction of the main shaft or intermediate shaft adjacent to the river, site access would be through Paradise Street, off Jamaica Road. For the intermediate with connection tunnel drive option, a one-way system has been suggested, with the addition of an egress directly onto Jamaica Road this could also be considered for the drive and intermediate (north side) options. Construction access for the intermediate (south side) option would be directly off Brunel Road, with egress onto Jamaica Road. For the operational phase, the hardstanding could be accessed directly from Fulford Street, which is off Paradise Street, for the drive, intermediate and intermediate (north side) with connection tunnel drive options. Access to the hardstanding for the intermediate (south side) options would be directly off Jamaica Road.
5.1.4
Rail
5.1.5 The site would be 2.5km from London Bridge Station, and Bermondsey underground station would be less than 0.5km away. There would be no viable railway for delivery or removal of materials.
Page 7
River
5.1.6 The provision of jetty/wharfage facilities would be potentially feasible at this site. There are small mooring pontoons opposite the site and it is assumed that these could be relocated to provide space for the new arrangements, if necessary. There would also be an impact on river usage/navigation. It would be necessary for this to be examined in detail in the form of a specific risk assessment (including modelling of barge movements), which would require discussions with and approval of the PLA. Material movement for construction of the main tunnel would likely be by river. Material movement for the intermediate site options would likely be by road. However, with the exception of the intermediate (south side) option, these sites are adjacent to the river and there may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport.
5.1.7 5.1.8
5.2
5.2.1
Construction works considerations

The playground facilities would need to be temporarily removed for construction of the drive, intermediate (north side) and intermediate with connection tunnel options. No other demolition would be required for these sites. The intermediate (south side) option would not require any demolition. Available data on third-party assets show that the main assets of concern would be the river wall, the residential buildings outside the western boundary of the site, the Church of St Peter and the Guardian Angels, the convent, Bosco Centre and the 1,143 x 762mm sewer in Fulford Street. Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. The proximity of the shafts on the northern part of the site to the river would mean that the tunnel alignment deviation from the centre of the river would be minimised. The location of intermediate shaft (south side) would cause the alignment of the main tunnel to deviate from the river and pass underneath medium-rise buildings and St Peters Church. It is likely that the proposed works could be constructed within the overall construction programme.
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.3
5.3.1
Permanent works considerations

The top structure would be raised to approximately 0.5m above ground level, but there is potential to hide the structure in an earth mound on the site. The location of the intermediate shaft (south side) would affect the alignment of the main tunnel, the Shad Thames connection tunnel and the Greenwich connection tunnel. The angle between the incoming and outgoing main tunnels would become more acute and this could create hydraulic issues.
5.3.2
Page 8
5.4
5.4.1
Health and safety

No unusual health and safety issues have been identified for the site.
6 6.1
6.1.1
Planning assessment Introduction

The planning assessment builds on the advantages and disadvantages reported in Table 2.3 and covers the following areas: Planning applications and permissions Planning context Planning comments.
6.2
6.2.1
Planning applications and permissions

An initial desktop search of the London Borough of Southwark online planning applications database did not identify any planning applications submitted within the last five years applicable to the site.
6.3
6.3.1
Planning context
The following is a summary of the relevant local planning policies and designations affecting the site and is taken from the current statutory development plan for the borough. The development plan comprises the saved policies from the London Borough of Southwark Core Strategy, adopted April 2011, saved policies in the Southwark Plan: the London Borough of Southwark Unitary Development Plan, adopted July 2007, and the London Plan, adopted July 2011. The site is in close proximity to residential properties. Should the site be used as a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site or as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site using the north side of the park, the closest residential properties would be in Cathay House and Kings Stairs Close. Use of the southern part of the site for a main tunnel reception/intermediate site would mean the closest residential properties would be Pilgrim House and numbers 8-14 Cottle Way. Should the site be used as a main tunnel drive site, the whole park would be required for construction and all properties mentioned above would be in close proximity to the works. Saved Southwark Plan Policy 3.2, Protection of Amenity, states that planning permission for development will not be granted where it would cause loss of amenity, including disturbance from noise, to present and future occupiers in the surrounding area or on the application site. Core Strategy Strategic Policy 13, High Environmental Standards, refers to Southwarks high standards supporting measures for reducing air, land, water, noise and light pollution, and avoiding amenity and environmental problems which may affect how we enjoy the environment in which we live and work.
6.3.2
6.3.3
Page 9
Site suitability report S54SK 6.3.4 The proposal site for all four construction scenarios closely matches an area indicated as Metropolitan Open Land (Kings Stairs Gardens). Core Strategy Policy 11, Open Spaces and Wildlife, protects Metropolitan Open Land, and saved Southwark Plan Policy 3.25, Metropolitan Open Land (MOL), states that there is a general presumption against inappropriate development on such land which results in a loss of open space. An area indicated as 'other open space (King Edward III Manor House) is located approximately 30m to the west of the central area of Kings Stairs Gardens, beyond a road and other buildings. This open space is also protected in Core Strategy Policy 11, Open Spaces and Wildlife. Kings Stairs Gardens is within a wider metropolitan park deficiency area. A district park and registered park and garden (Southwark Park) lies beyond a dual carriageway (Jamaica Road) to the south of the site. This site is also designated MOL. Use of the site would not directly impact on Southwark Park. The River Thames to the north of Kings Stairs Gardens is designated as a site of importance for nature conservation (SINC) and Kings Stairs Gardens itself is proposed as a SINC in Southwark councils emerging Canada Water Area Action Plan. Core Strategy Strategic Policy 11, Open Spaces and Wildlife, protects such designations from inappropriate development. Saved Southwark Plan Policy 3.28, Biodiversity, states that the council will seek enhancement of biodiversity as part of development proposals, and mitigation and/or compensation for damage to biodiversity. The site is located within a wider air quality management area. Core Strategy Strategic Policy 11, High Environmental Standards, seeks to protect air quality. Saved Southwark Plan Policy 3.6, Air Quality Management Area, states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would lead to a reduction in air quality. The London Borough of Southwark has designated Kings Stairs Gardens as a conservation area. The site also lies within an archaeological priority zone and therefore has implications for all four of the development options considered within this report. Two Grade II listed features also lie in close proximity of the site, and a scheduled monument is located approximately 30m to the west of Kings Stairs Gardens (moated manor house of Edward III, Rotherhithe). These historic assets are all protected by development plan policy. Core Strategy Strategic Policy 12, Design and Conservation, seeks to protect and enhance Southwarks historic assets, their settings and wider historic environment, including conservation areas, archaeological priority zones and sites, listed and locally listed buildings, registered parks and gardens and scheduled monuments. In addition, saved Southwark Plan Policy 3.15, Conservation of the Historic Environment, also requires that development should preserve or enhance the special interest of historic character or appearance of buildings, or areas of historical or architectural significance. Saved Southwark Plan Policy 19, Archaeological Priority Zone, requires that planning applications for sites which fall within this designation will include an archaeological assessment and evaluation of the impact of the development. Saved Southwark Plan Policy 3.18, Setting of Listed Buildings, Conservation
6.3.5
6.3.6 6.3.7
6.3.8
6.3.9
6.3.10
Page 10
Site suitability report S54SK Areas and World Heritage Sites, states that the setting of such sites will be protected from inappropriate development. 6.3.11 The site in its entirety is located within the wider Thames Special Policy Area, within which special controls of developments adjacent to the riverside will be imposed in order to enhance the character of the area, and ensure continued and improved access to the river. Development on the southern part of the site will, however, have less of an impact on river access, given its location away from the riverside. Core Strategy Strategic Policy 12, Design and Conservation, seeks to carefully manage the design of development in the Thames Policy Area. Saved Southwark Plan Policy 3.29, Development within the Thames Policy Area, states that special controls of development adjacent to the riverside will be imposed in order to enhance the character of the area, and ensure continued and improved access to the river.
6.3.12
6.4
6.4.1
Planning comments
A number of planning designations are applicable both on and adjacent to the site. These designations have been identified and described in Section 6.3. Those designations relating to residential amenity, Metropolitan Open Land, the historic environment, air quality and the Thames Policy Area are the most likely to be affected and lead to potential conflict with planning policy. The site is within a residential area with properties situated close by, and the nearest dwellings are within ten metres of the proposed worksite for the main tunnel drive site, main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site and main tunnel reception/intermediate site located in the north of the gardens. Should the site be used for the main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site with construction works located in the south of the gardens, properties would be even closer to the proposed works. This separation distance may not be sufficient to protect residential amenity and may require significant mitigation to reduce negative impacts. This may include location of the most disruptive and neighbourly construction works towards the centre of the northern part of the site for use of Kings Stairs Gardens as a main tunnel site, main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site and main tunnel reception/intermediate site located in the north of the gardens and away from the eastern boundary of the southern construction site, should Kings Stairs Gardens be used as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site using the south of the gardens. Further, a review of working hours on site could be considered to reduce the impacts of construction noise on residents. The proposals to use the southern part of the gardens for a main tunnel reception/intermediate site include locating the shaft within 50m of St Peters and the Guardian Angels RC Church and the proposed access to the site would be taken from Jamaica Road. Use of the northern part of the site for a main tunnel drive site, main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site or a main tunnel reception/intermediate site would involve locating the shaft within 70m of the church with access along Paradise Street, which runs
6.4.2
Page 11
Site suitability report S54SK along the northern boundary of the church and to the rear of the Bosco Centre, adjacent to its nursery play area. Use of the southern part of the gardens instead of the northern section would remove the need to close Fulford Street. Again, suitable mitigation measures would be required to avoid an unacceptable level of impact and disturbance to the church and Bosco Centre during the construction period. 6.4.3 Kings Stairs Gardens in its entirety is designated MOL, for which there is a general presumption against inappropriate development that would result in a loss of open space. The site also falls within a district park deficiency area and a metropolitan park deficiency area. Use of the park for a main tunnel drive site would require Kings Stairs Gardens in its entirely, whereas use as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site (both south and north) and main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site would only require part of the gardens for construction. In these scenarios, the remaining parkland may be sufficient to meet the open space needs of the local community during the years of construction. Additionally, Southwark Park, which is also designated MOL, is located to the south of Kings Stairs Gardens, on the south side of Jamaica Road, may also serve to satisfy local needs. There is no record of tree preservation orders within the site, however the site lies within the recently designated Edward III Conservation Area. Proposals should therefore aim to minimise the loss of trees (which may require reorganisation of plant, welfare facilities and materials during construction), in particular to avoid the loss of trees along Fulford Street. In addition to the site being a conservation area, there are two Grade II listed features to the west of the site, however these are beyond buildings and are unlikely to be affected by use of the site. There is also a scheduled monument approximately 30m to the west of the site (moated manor house of Edward III, Rotherhithe). This is also unlikely to be directly affected by the proposal, particularly by works in the southern part of the site, which would be located further to the east, away from the designations. Further appraisal of the heritage consideration is provided in Section 7 of this report. Kings Stairs Gardens falls within an archaeology priority area and therefore should the gardens be used for any of the four options proposed, suitable investigation and remediation works would need to be agreed with the local planning authority in accordance with the saved policy in the Southwark Plan. The proposal site is adjacent to the River Thames, the foreshore of which is a designated site of importance for nature conservation (SINC). This is a general designation, covering the entire River Thames. Given the extensive nature of this designation and the purpose of Thames Tunnel project to improve the environmental condition of the river, with appropriate mitigation, it is unlikely there would be any adverse impact on this designation, particularly when using the southern part of the site away from the river frontage. Southwark Park, to the south side of Jamaica Road, is also a designated SINC and a more detailed assessment of the likely impact is included in Section 7. It is also worth noting that the London Borough of Southwark is proposing to designate
6.4.4
6.4.5
Page 12
Site suitability report S54SK Kings Stairs Gardens itself as a SINC in its emerging Canada Water Area Action Plan. 6.4.6 The construction works and remaining top structures required as part of all four site options should not be overly prominent in this location and should not obstruct local views. However, the impact of structures on the southern part of the site (which could be used as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site) could potentially be more significant than structures in the northern part of the gardens as they would be located in close proximity to the church, convent and Bosco Centre to the west, and residential dwellings to the east.
7 7.1
7.1.1
Environmental appraisal Introduction

The following sections summarise specialist assessments which are provided in Appendix 9 Environmental appraisal tables.
7.2
Transport Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment Option 1 (northern site layout)
7.2.1
The site is suitable in transport terms as a reception/intermediate site (Option 1), incorporating some of Kings Stairs Gardens. Access to the site will be located at the end of Paradise Street and some parking bays close to the access may require removal for construction vehicles. Approximately 30-35 on-street parking bays would be displaced by the site. A new car park which could be provided on site to compensate for the loss will require further investigation. Pedestrian access to a church and the remainder of the park would need to be maintained. The Thames Path and cycle route require diversion, in addition to some footways within the park. The access route to the TLRN (A200) is suitable, with no major constraints. Potential rail access at the old London Bridge rail site requires the removal of traffic calming (raised table and junction) on St James Road and a means of transporting materials to the railway. Potential rail access at the East London Line depot passes over one bridge with no visible constraints and under two rail bridges with height restrictions. River access is not essential for the intermediate shaft site as excavated material is to be transported by road to a main site. Reasonable potential exists for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking is to be provided on site for the workforce. On-street parking on surrounding roads would be unsuitable as this is restricted to a maximum stay of four hours.
7.2.2
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment Option 2 (southern site layout)

7.2.3 The site is suitable in transport terms as a reception/intermediate site (Option 2). The site access and egress will require construction.
Page 13
Site suitability report S54SK However, there is direct access to the TLRN (A200), with no major constraints. 7.2.4 Points on potential rail access, river access, the potential for the workforce to utilise public transport, and onsite and on-street parking are the same as for the reception/intermediate site (Option 1).
Main tunnel drive site assessment

7.2.5 This would be the same as for the reception/intermediate site (Option 1) assessment above, except river access may be possible via overhead material conveyors. The City Cruises mooring point may need to be relocated.
Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site assessment

7.2.6 This would be the same as for the main tunnel drive site assessment above, except that construction of a temporary egress with a left-out only onto Jamaica Road (A200) set-up would be required, enabling a one-way system through the site for construction vehicles. A pedestrian footbridge would be constructed over Jamaica Road (A200) to maintain access to the church via Kings Stairs Gardens.
7.3
7.3.1
Archaeology
The site is suitable as a reception/intermediate (both options), main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site or a main tunnel drive site, although due to a lack of previous investigations in the area, the nature and extent of archaeological receptors cannot be confidently predicted. It is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within the site. Peat deposits containing archaeological material have been commonly recorded throughout London in a similar proximity to the River Thames. Given the location of the site, and wider evidence for historical occupation along the river, it is a reasonable assumption to suggest that waterlogged remains of archaeological value may be present.
7.3.2
7.4
Built heritage and townscape Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment (both options)
7.4.1
In terms of built heritage, the site is likely to be suitable as a reception/ intermediate site (both options), as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The site may potentially give rise to adverse indirect impacts on two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden, and ten listed buildings. It is likely that these impacts could be mitigated through a carefully considered scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. In terms of townscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as a reception/intermediate site (both options). The site has the potential to
7.4.2
Page 14
Site suitability report S54SK give rise to direct adverse impacts on a protected view, the character of the park, a public open space, the river frontage and local views (especially during construction, which would involve the removal of mature vegetation). Permanent elements would potentially result in adverse direct impacts on the character of the park. Adverse impacts could be partially minimised through a carefully considered scheme design (including sensitive positioning of temporary and permanent structures away from the riverfront, and the retention of existing trees where possible) and/or screening and landscaping. Such mitigation could allow the site to be progressed further, but a more detailed assessment of likely impacts and appropriate mitigation measures would be required, particularly with regards to the Greenwich Park Protected View, which passes through the southwest corner of the site.
Main tunnel drive site, main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site assessments
7.4.3 In terms of built heritage, the site is likely to be suitable as a main tunnel drive site or main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site, as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The details are as for the intermediate, above. In terms of townscape and landscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as a main tunnel drive site or main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site. The details are as for the reception/ intermediate, above. The main tunnel drive site and main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site have the potential to result in a higher magnitude of impact on landscape character and receptors, due to the increased size of the site and the requirement for structure on the River Thames foreshore, especially during construction.
7.4.4
7.4.5
7.5
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Main tunnel drive site, main tunnel reception/intermediate site (northern layout), main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site assessments
7.5.1
The site is suitable for use as a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site, or as a main tunnel drive site as although construction would take place within Chalk (principal aquifer), the site does not lie within the source protection zones or total catchment zones of licensed abstractions. No long-term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering would be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 27.1m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design. The superficial deposits are alluvium, which is classified as a secondary aquifer at the shaft site, and limited impact on flow in the shallow aquifer is anticipated due to a diaphragm wall or caissons.
Page 15
Site suitability report S54SK 7.5.2 In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because there is no direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution, although standard mitigation would, however, be required.
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment Option 2 (south)

7.5.3 This site is suitable for use as a reception/intermediate site (Option 2) for the same reasons as a reception/intermediate site (Option 1). However, the Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 36m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design.
7.6
Ecology Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment (both options)
7.6.1
The site is less suitable for use as a reception/intermediate site (both options) as it appears that habitats present could act as an extension of an adjacent BGII site for nature conservation (Southwark Park). The area could therefore support roosting bats, birds of conservation concern and locally notable invertebrates, which in turn may place habitat compensation requirements on the project. A survey would be required to determine the presence of such species and to determine risks.
Main tunnel drive site, main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site assessments
7.6.2 This site is less suitable for use as a main tunnel drive site or main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site for the reasons given above for the reception/intermediate site, and due to the requirement for temporary and permanent land-take from the foreshore and river (a site of metropolitan importance). This may require sensitive working practices, and there may also be a need for seasonal restrictions on working and some compensatory provision. There could also be potential cumulative effects with other jetty structures in the river, and careful negotiation with the EA is likely to be required.
7.7
7.7.1
Flood risk
The site is suitable for use as a reception/intermediate site (both options), main tunnel drive site or a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site because although the site is within Flood Zone 3 (greater than one in 200-year risk of flooding), the site is protected to the one in 1,000-year flood level and so flood risk will be assessed as residual. In addition, there is potentially space for attenuation SUDS, although an investigation is required to determine the suitability for infiltration SUDS.
Page 16
7.8
7.8.1
Air quality
The site is less suitable for use as a reception/intermediate site (both options), main tunnel drive site or a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site due to the proximity of residential properties, since there is potential for emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. Dust impacts may be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is also potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This can be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
7.9
Noise Main tunnel site, main tunnel reception/intermediate site (northern site layout) or with connection tunnel drive
7.9.1
This site is considered less suitable for use as a reception/intermediate site (northern site layout), main tunnel drive site or a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site due to the proximity of residential receptors to the west, south and east. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers would be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Twenty-four hour working has particular potential to adversely impact on the closest receptors, and it may be necessary to restrict some of the noisier activities to daytime only. Access of HGVs to the site is also likely to result in disturbance, as they approach through residential streets. For a main tunnel drive site and the main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site, the importing and exporting of materials by barge could also result in an adverse impact on residential receptors located near to the barge jetties.
7.9.2
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment Option 2 (southern site layout)

7.9.3 This site is considered suitable for use as a reception/ intermediate site (Option 2). The existing noise climate is likely to be dominated by road traffic on the A200 located immediately adjacent to the site and temporary working area, and HGVs will enter and egress the site directly onto the A200, resulting in less impact on nearby receptors. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 75 metres. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers is likely to be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Working 24 hours has particular potential to adversely impact on the closest receptors and should use of this site be pursued, it may be necessary to restrict some of the noisier activities to daytime only.
Page 17
7.10
Land quality Main tunnel drive site, main tunnel reception/intermediate site (northern site layout) or main tunnel reception/ intermediate with connection tunnel drive site assessments
7.10.1
The site is considered suitable for use as a reception/intermediate site (northern layout), main tunnel drive site or a main tunnel reception/ intermediate with connection tunnel drive site based on the low potential for contamination of the site to have occurred. The site is currently landscaped for use as playground/gardens and historically it has not been developed for industrial use. The proposed shaft is not located near any of the potential contaminants identified. There is a potential for unexploded ordnance to be present on site as historical information indicates that nearby areas have been cleared of ordnance. It would therefore be prudent for a UXO survey (or equivalent) to be conducted at the site if not done so already.
7.10.2
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment (southern site layout)

7.10.3 The site is considered less suitable for use as a reception/intermediate site (southern site layout) based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from the historic engineering works which are located at the proposed shaft site, the fuel tanks and wharf operations in the northern region of the site and the above-ground fuel tanks located in the vicinity of the site. The site potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways, as well as ground gas risks. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer, and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport. There is potential for unexploded ordnance to be present on site as historical information indicates that nearby areas have been cleared of ordnance. It would therefore be prudent for a UXO survey (or equivalent) to be conducted at the site if not done so already.
7.10.4
7.10.5
8 8.1
8.1.1
Socio-economic and community assessment Introduction

The socio-economic and community assessment builds on the advantages and disadvantages reported in Table 2.3 and covers the following areas: Socio-economic profile Socio-economic and community issues and impacts.
Page 18
8.2
8.2.1
Socio-economic profile
The site is located within the Rotherhithe ward of the London Borough of Southwark. Statistics from ONS 2001 Census data show the following indicators for the ward, in comparison to the rest of Southwark, London and England: Higher percentage of economically active, aged people that are full-time employees than the borough or the country as a whole Slightly lower percentage of unemployed people in the ward than the borough as a whole, but a higher percentage than in the city and country Percentage of people who have achieved Level 4 or 5 educational qualifications is similar to the borough as a whole but is significantly higher than the figure for London or the national average Age profile for the ward is roughly similar to that of the borough as a whole and England, with the only noteworthy differences being the slightly lower percentage in the 16-19 and 60-74 age groups Greater predominance of white British residents than the borough, but otherwise the ethnic make-up is similar, with no other dominant ethnic origins.
8.2.2
In terms of deprivation, statistics for the neighbourhood around the site (Southwark 007D) indicate that the area is one of the most deprived in the country, with particular problems in terms of income, crime, barriers to housing and the deprivation of the living environment. Signage recorded at the site indicates that park users speak Turkish, Vietnamese, Spanish, French, Somali, Bangla and Chinese. The neighbourhood of Kings Stairs Gardens seems to have a complex socio-economic make-up, with diverse ethnic backgrounds. The gardens may be a source of shared community pride, and may act as an equalising factor in the area.
8.2.3 8.2.4
8.3
8.3.1
Issues and impacts

The site is being assessed for use as a main tunnel drive site, a main tunnel reception/intermediate site (in two locations to the north and south of the site) and as a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site.
Main tunnel site

8.3.2 The main tunnel site covers the majority of Kings Stairs Gardens, including the newly developed childrens playground. Loss of the majority of the park, even on a temporary basis, is likely to affect recreational users. The childrens play area appears newly developed and is likely to be lost for the duration of the construction works. The play area has seen recent investment, and site visits have confirmed that it is well used.
Page 19
Site suitability report S54SK 8.3.3 Southwark Park is, however, located in close proximity to the south of the site on the other side of Jamaica Road, and therefore provides a potential alternative area of public open space as it is a very large public park with a diverse range of facilities. The proposed main tunnel site works also appear likely to have a great degree of impact on the residents living in Cathay House (Southwark council housing) and The Mission to the west, as well as the private residences on Kings Stairs Close and Elephant Lane, as these properties are in close proximity to the works, with many directly overlooking the gardens. Residents of Pilgrim House may also potentially be affected as this building is located opposite the south-eastern corner of the site. The Angel public house is also likely to face disruption from works on the site. Adjacent to this is a small paved area at the riverfront, which is currently used as a fishing spot by local people who may also be disrupted by the works. Also potentially impacted are St Peters and the Guardian Angels Church and its presbytery. St Peters is located within the site polygon but the church is outside the proposed worksite. There is also a convent located adjacent to the site to the south, and any impact on either of these facilities may affect community cohesion and have a disproportionately impact on specific faith groups. A further church is located in the vicinity to the east, but its distance from the main works area suggests it may not be significantly affected. Located to the south of the site is the Bosco Centre, a community facility including a nursery, after-school club and training centre. Any impact on this facility could affect community cohesion and disproportionately impact on young people in the area. Located opposite the site to the east is a civic centre and library, but these appear likely to be at a sufficient distance to prevent any significant impact on their use by the local community. The proposed materials jetties required for a main tunnel site seem likely to impede views from several residential properties adjacent to the site, both east and west. Use of the site would also require the temporary diversion of the Thames Path. The permanent structures required on site after construction work has been completed appear unlikely to impact on the use of the park or the surrounding community.
8.3.4
8.3.5
8.3.6
8.3.7
8.3.8
8.3.9
8.3.10
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site north side of site

8.3.11 The proposed main tunnel reception/intermediate site works for the north side of the site are concentrated towards the north-western corner of the gardens. Around half the gardens are likely to be temporarily lost, including the play area. Residents of Cathay House and The Mission, the Angel public house, the church, convent and Bosco Centre adjacent to the site appear likely to be affected by the proposed works in this location but, due to the reduced scope of works (particularly the lack of tunnelling), it may be possible to mitigate them.
Page 20
Site suitability report S54SK 8.3.12 This type of site would not involve jetties so the impact on the Thames Path and the residential properties which overlook the river is likely to be less than for a main shaft site in this location. The residential properties to the east of Kings Stairs Gardens also appear likely to suffer less disruption due to their separation from the works area. The permanent structures required on site after construction work has been completed appear unlikely to impact on the use of the park or the surrounding community.
8.3.13
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site south side of site

8.3.14 The proposed main tunnel reception/intermediate site works located towards the southern side of the site appear likely to have the greatest impact on the residential properties at the southern end of Elephant Lane and Pilgrim House. Also likely to be affected by works in this location are the church, convent and Bosco Centre, as the works would be located in closer proximity to the east of these facilities. Conversely, Cathay House, the Angel public house and the residential properties on Kings Stairs Close and at the northern end of Elephant Lane are likely to be less impacted than for the main tunnel reception/intermediate site option for the north of the site. As this type of site does not require jetties, impact on the Thames Path and the residential properties which overlook the river is likely to be less than for a main shaft site in this location. The permanent structures required on site after construction work has been completed appear unlikely to impact on the use of the park or the surrounding community.
8.3.15
8.3.16
Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site

8.3.17 Around half the gardens are likely to be temporarily lost under the proposed main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site option, including the play area. In addition to impacts on residents of Cathay House and The Mission, this type of site is likely to impact on residents in Kings Stairs Close and the Angel public house. Additional works associated with the construction of the connection tunnel would require the presence of a materials jetty in the river in front of the gardens, which is likely to impact on the Angel public house, as well as residents living on the east and west of the site. Impacts on the church, convent and Bosco Centre adjacent to the south site appear likely to be similar to those associated with a main shaft site. The permanent structures required on site after construction work has been completed appear unlikely to impact on the use of the park or the surrounding community.
8.3.18
8.3.19
Page 21
9 9.1
9.1.1
Property assessment Introduction

The site comprises Kings Stairs Gardens, Southwark. Three site options are under consideration: A main tunnel site, two different intermediate site layouts, and main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site.
9.2
9.2.1 9.2.2
Crown land and special land comments

The majority of the land is owned by the London Borough of Southwark. The land is open space and may be classified as special land under S.131 of the Planning Act 2008. If this is the case and if an acquisition cannot be agreed with the owner, special parliamentary procedure may be needed after the Secretary of State has decided that the order should be confirmed. As the whole order would be subject to the special parliamentary procedure, not just the acquisition of this site, the project could be delayed by a minimum period of several months in the best case. In the worst case, the order might be rejected by Parliament, which could delay the project for a much longer period and even result in the order failing, although this is considered unlikely. If the site is considered to be special land, a special parliamentary procedure may not be required if exchange land is provided. Alternatively, where temporary works powers only are required, this would not amount to land acquisition and the issue of a special parliamentary procedure would not arise. Otherwise, the provision of exchange land should be included in the order, although it is likely to be difficult to identify an appropriate replacement. Contact should be made with the owner as soon as possible to establish if an acquisition can be agreed. The land at 1 Fulford Street, which is required as part of the main site construction phase, is privately owned. It appears this property is neither Crown land nor special land. Therefore, there should be no procedural difficulty in acquiring the land using compulsory purchase powers. The foreshore and riverbed, which would be needed for conveyors and jetties for the main site, are likely to be owned by the Crown or PLA. Crown land cannot be compulsorily purchased. Therefore, there is a risk that this land cannot be acquired. PLA land can be compulsorily purchased but a compulsory acquisition that is opposed by the PLA will create risk. The foreshore is not easily accessible by the public and does not appear to be used by the public. Therefore, it is unlikely to be considered open space for the purpose of S.131 of the Planning Act 2008. If the site is considered to be special land, a special parliamentary procedure would then be required, unless exchange land is provided or the site is smaller than 200 square metres. Alternatively, it may be possible to avoid including land acquisition powers and instead rely on the
9.2.3
9.2.4 9.2.5 9.2.6
9.2.7
9.2.8
9.2.9
Page 22
Site suitability report S54SK PLA licensing regime. If temporary works powers only are required, this would not amount to land acquisition and the issue would not arise. 9.2.10 Contact should be made with the owner as soon as possible to establish if an acquisition can be agreed.
9.3
9.3.1
Land to be acquired
The compensation assessment assumes that the worksite would be acquired temporarily, via the acquisition of new rights for the period of the works stated in the engineering section above, in the case of a main shaft and both intermediate shaft site options. The temporary worksite required for a main shaft takes up the majority of the park area, while the intermediate shaft options require much smaller working areas in the northern part of the park. Compensation in relation to 1 Fulford Street has been assessed, assuming a permanent acquisition. Access to the worksite would be gained via existing roads, Paradise Street and Fulford Street, with a possible egress onto Jamacia Road. The main tunnel drive site and main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site options require material conveyors and jetties to the River Thames, and would therefore require temporary rights over the foreshore and riverbed during the construction phase. These options would also involve acquiring rights to construct and operate an overflow culvert from the shaft into the river. The operational phase would require the acquisition of a freehold area in the northern part of the site, with dimensions of approximately 40m by 50m for the main site and 40m by 40m for the reception/intermediate option. A right of way to enable access to the above freehold would be via the existing road network.
9.3.2
9.3.3 9.3.4 9.3.5
9.3.6
9.3.7
9.4
Property valuation comments General
9.4.1 9.4.2 9.4.3
The freehold is owned by the London Borough of Southwark, with the freehold of 1 Fulford Street being in private ownership. There is no referencing information regarding any leasehold interests in the site. The planning history shows that there has been no planning application activity for the site. Therefore, it appears the site has no significant development potential, apart from 1 Fulford Street.
Main tunnel site

9.4.4 The land would be reinstated after the works are complete as a part of the engineering works and therefore reinstatement costs are not included in the compensation assessment.
Page 23
Site suitability report S54SK 9.4.5 Compensation for the acquisition of new rights is normally based on the diminution in value to the land caused by the acquisition. Compensation for the permanent acquisition of land is normally based on market value. However, compensation for the permanent acquisition of unusual types of property, where there is no general market, can be assessed on the basis of the cost of equivalent reinstatement at a new site, but there must be a genuine intention to reinstate. If compensation is assessed on a diminution in value basis for the new rights needed over the park (temporary occupation during works, access rights during works, access rights for operational purposes) and on a market value basis for the permanent acquisition, the costs are likely to be relatively low and therefore acceptable. If compensation is assessed on an equivalent reinstatement basis, the acquisition costs would be significantly higher, but possibly acceptable. Although finding replacement land may be difficult, compensation has been assessed on an equivalent reinstatement basis in order to be prudent. The site has good river access and therefore there should be no significant additional costs associated with acquiring rights for material transfer such as a conveyors and jetties. The drawings show that the new materials conveyor may require the demolition of 1 Fulford Street. The route of the conveyor could be moved slightly to avoid this property.
9.4.6
9.4.7 9.4.8
9.4.9
9.4.10
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site north side or with a connection tunnel

9.4.11 9.4.12 9.4.13 9.4.14 The same comments apply in relation to the reception/intermediate site option as for the main site, except for the comments set out below. As the site area acquired would be smaller than a main tunnel site option, the acquisition cost would be lower and acceptable. For the reception/intermediate site only, there would be no requirement for rights for material transfer, such as a conveyor and jetties. There would be no requirement for the acquisition of the property at 1 Fulford Street.

9.4.15 The same comments apply as to the reception/intermediate site option above.
9.5
9.5.1 9.5.2
Disturbance compensation comments

The site is used as a public park and it is unlikely that there would be any claim for disturbance associated with this use. With regard to the acquisition of 1 Fulford Street, disturbance compensation covering relocation costs would be payable if the building is occupied at the time of acquisition, but these costs would be acceptable.
Page 24
9.6
9.6.1
Discretionary purchase costs comments

For part of the construction period, onsite working 24 hours a day, seven days a week, is proposed. The site adjoins various residential developments. There is therefore a risk of significant discretionary purchase costs.
9.7
9.7.1
Offsite statutory compensation comments

There is limited potential for claims under Part 1 of the Land Compensation Act 1973, as the completed works are unlikely to result in diminution in value to property. Provided access is maintained to adjacent properties during the construction phase, there should be limited potential for claims under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965. The arrangement of the temporary working area should avoid closure of the access via Paradise Street to the church immediately to the south of the working site, in order to reduce the likelihood of such a claim.
9.7.2
9.8
9.8.1 9.8.2
Site acquisition cost assessment

The statutory acquisition costs could be high, making the site less suitable for the main tunnel site option. The statutory acquisition costs are likely to be acceptable for both of the reception/intermediate site options.
10 10.1
10.1.1
Site conclusions by discipline Introduction

The conclusions presented in this section are drawn from each disciplines assessment, and are designed to inform the workshop where a final conclusion is reached on whether the site can be taken forward as a potential preferred site, subject to its fit with possible drive strategies in the case of main tunnel sites.
10.2
Engineering Main tunnel drive site
10.2.1
This site is considered suitable as a main tunnel drive site because it would be large enough to fit all the site facilities, there would be no demolition required other than the playground, and wharfage/jetty facilities could be provided.

10.2.2 This site is considered suitable as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site because it would be large enough to fit all the site facilities and there would be no demolition required other than the playground.
Page 25

10.2.3 Although this site is large enough to fit all the site facilities without the need for demolition, the site is considered less suitable because of potential issues associated with the alignment of the main tunnel.
Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel site

10.2.4 This site is considered suitable as a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel site as it would be large enough to fit all the site facilities, there would be no demolition required other than the playground, and wharfage/jetty facilities could be provided.
10.3
Planning Main tunnel drive site
10.3.1
This site is considered less suitable for a main tunnel drive site. There are a number of planning designations that are applicable to the site, including its designation as Metropolitan Open Land and as a conservation area. The site is also surrounded by sensitive receptors, including residential dwellings, a church, convent and the Bosco Centre, which includes a nursery and college. The use of Kings Stairs Gardens as a main tunnel drive site will result in a loss of amenity space. Notwithstanding the metropolitan park deficiency area which affects the borough as a whole, the immediate area is well served by parks and open spaces locally, especially Southwark Park.
10.3.2

10.3.3 This site is considered less suitable for a main tunnel reception/ intermediate site (north side of the site). There are a number of planning designations that are applicable to the site, including its designation as Metropolitan Open Land and as a conservation area. The site is also surrounded by sensitive receptors, including a large number of residential dwellings. Site access is also via Paradise Street, which runs to the northern boundaries of both St Peter and the Guardian Angels Roman Catholic Church and the Bosco Centre, potentially impacting on the amenity of both. The use of Kings Stairs Gardens as a main tunnel site will result in a loss of amenity space. Notwithstanding the metropolitan park deficiency area which affects the borough as a whole, the immediate area is well served by parks and open spaces locally, especially Southwark Park.
10.3.4

10.3.5 This site is considered less suitable for a main tunnel reception/ intermediate site (south side of the site). There are a number of planning designations that are applicable to the site, including its designation as Metropolitan Open Land and as a conservation area. The site is also surrounded by sensitive receptors, including a large number of residential
Page 26
Site suitability report S54SK dwellings, St Peter and the Guardian Angels Roman Catholic Church, a convent and the Bosco Centre, and there is little scope to increase the separation distance between the works and the facades of adjacent dwellings. 10.3.6 The use of Kings Stairs Gardens as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site will result in a loss of amenity space. However, the loss would be less than that for a main tunnel drive site, main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site and main tunnel reception/intermediate site (north side of the gardens). Notwithstanding the metropolitan park deficiency area which affects the borough as a whole, the immediate area is well served by parks and open spaces locally, especially Southwark Park.
Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site

10.3.7 This site is considered less suitable for a main tunnel reception/ intermediate with connection tunnel drive site. There are a number of planning designations that are applicable to the site, including its designation as Metropolitan Open Land and as a conservation area. The site is also surrounded by sensitive receptors, including a large number of residential dwellings. Site access is also via Paradise Street, which runs to the northern boundaries of both St Peter and the Guardian Angels Roman Catholic Church and the Bosco Centre, potentially impacting on the amenity of both. The use of Kings Stairs Gardens as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site will result in a loss of amenity space. Notwithstanding the metropolitan park deficiency area which affects the borough as a whole, the immediate area is well served by parks and open spaces locally, especially Southwark Park.
10.3.8
10.4
10.4.1
Environment
Overall, the site is considered suitable as a main tunnel reception/ intermediate site (both options or with a connection tunnel drive) or a main tunnel drive site, although mitigation would be required to enable the site to be used. Based on current information, the site is suitable from the perspective of transport, archaeology, built heritage, water resources (hydrogeology and surface water), flood risk, and noise (for all main tunnel reception/intermediate site options). The site is considered less suitable from the perspective of townscape, ecology, air quality, and noise (for all site options). In respect of land quality, the site is considered suitable as a main tunnel drive site or a main tunnel reception/intermediate site north side of site layout or with connection tunnel drive layout option. The site is considered less suitable as intermediate shaft (main tunnel reception/intermediate site south side of site layout option).
10.4.2
10.4.3 10.4.4
Page 27
Site suitability report S54SK 10.4.5 Overall, the site is considered suitable, subject to further investigation of whether townscape, ecology, air quality, noise and land quality impacts could all be adequately mitigated. Likely mitigation considerations would include the following: Townscape a high-quality scheme design to minimise impacts on the character of the park, local views and potentially on a protected view would be required. Ecology ecological surveys would be required to determine the presence of any protected or notable species. Some compensatory habitat provision may be required for any loss of BAP priority habitat within the park. Where development occurs on the foreshore, there is likely to be a requirement for sensitive working practices and potentially for seasonal restrictions on working and compensatory provision. Noise standard noise barriers are unlikely to be effective for upper floors of adjacent blocks, and other techniques including limits on working hours may be required to reduce construction noise to acceptable levels. Air quality measures to ensure dust at the closest receptors is adequately mitigated for. Land quality any required remediation of contamination (at this moderate risk site) and/or measures to ensure no mobilisation of contaminants retained in situ.
10.5
Socio-economic and community Main tunnel drive site
10.5.1
This site is not suitable for use as a main tunnel drive site from a community impacts perspective, as the temporary loss of the majority of Kings Stairs Gardens is considered likely to have a severe impact on the local community. The temporary loss of the playground on site and potential impact on the dense residential properties adjacent to the site on both east and west, as well as the church, convent and Bosco Centre adjacent to the south of the site, compound the potential community impact. Given the scale of proposed works, it appears likely that it would be difficult to successfully mitigate the potential community impacts.
10.5.2
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site north side of the site

10.5.3 This site is less suitable for use as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site in this location, even though around only half the gardens would be used. It appears likely that use of the site for this option will have a number of impacts on the local community, including the temporary loss of the playground, the impact on the dense residential properties adjacent to
Page 28
Site suitability report S54SK the site on both east and west, as well as the church, convent and Bosco Centre adjacent to the south of the site. 10.5.4 Mitigation would include discussions around reprovision of green space and play facilities, along with noise attenuation during site works. Community safety during works would also be an important issue to address.

10.5.5 This site is also less suitable for use as a main tunnel reception/ intermediate site in this location, even though it appears less than half the gardens would be used. While the playground would not be temporarily lost if this option was implemented, there may be a number of impacts on the local community, including impacts on the residential properties in close proximity to the site to the east, as well as the church, convent and the Bosco Centre adjacent to the site to the west. Mitigation would include discussions around noise attenuation during site works, especially in relation to the adjacent churches. Community safety during works would also be an important issue to address.
10.5.6
Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel site

10.5.7 This site is not suitable as a main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site as, in addition to the impacts associated with a reception/intermediate site works, this option would involve substantial tunnelling works on site and a large jetty in the river. The greater scope of works on site appears likely to increase the impact on the neighbouring residential properties, particularly those to the west of the site, as well as the church, convent and Bosco Centre to the south. The jetty appears likely to impact on the Angel public house and riverside residences in the area. In conclusion, the proportion of the park likely to be temporarily lost for any of the four site options is an important issue, especially the loss of the new childrens play area. This loss of open space can, in part, be mitigated for, due to the availability of alternative open space in the vicinity in the form of Southwark Park. However, the character of Kings Stairs Gardens as a river-facing public open space may be difficult to replicate. There will be a number of potential impacts on the local community caused by the temporary loss and disruption to the park, as well as the potential for works to impact on the residential properties which are in close proximity to the west and east of the gardens, the church, convent and the community facilities and services provided by the Bosco Centre.
10.5.8
10.6
Property Main tunnel drive site
10.6.1
The site is considered to be less suitable as a main tunnel drive site.
Page 29
Site suitability report S54SK 10.6.2 10.6.3 The advantage of the site is as follows: 10.6.4 Not a developed site. Special parliamentary procedure may be required Foreshore is likely to be Crown land or PLA land Acquisition costs could be significant, but possibly acceptable. The disadvantages of the site are as follows:
The engineering drawings for the main shaft include the eastern end of Paradise Street within the temporary working area. This would affect access to the church and other adjacent buildings, and could give rise to a claim for compensation under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965. The site boundary should be moved slightly to avoid interfering with this access. The drawings show that the new materials conveyor would require the demolition of 1 Fulford Street, which appears to be a vacant house. The route of the conveyor could be moved slightly to avoid this property.
10.6.5
Main tunnel reception/intermediate site (both options or with connection tunnel)

10.6.6 10.6.7 The site is suitable as a main tunnel reception/intermediate site (both options or with connection tunnel). The advantages of the site are as follows: 10.6.8 10.6.9 Not a developed site Acquisition costs are likely to be acceptable. Special parliamentary procedure may be required Foreshore is likely to be Crown land.
The disadvantages of the site are:
The engineering drawings for the main tunnel reception/intermediate site north side of the site layout includes the eastern end of Paradise Street within the temporary working area. This would affect access to the church and other adjacent buildings, and could give rise to a claim for compensation under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965. The site boundary should be moved slightly to avoid interfering with this access. This does not apply to the main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site option.
10.7
10.7.1
Next steps in the site selection process

It should be noted at this point the above conclusions do not represent an overall recommendation on the suitability of a site. The disciplines discuss their site suitability report conclusions at optioneering workshops, along with main tunnel drive strategy options. Main tunnel sites need to link together to form possible drive options for construction of the main tunnel. Therefore, a preferred site can only be identified through a series of main tunnel drive option comparisons. The outcome of this two-step process
Page 30
Site suitability report S54SK (sites and then drive option comparisons) is set out in the Phase two scheme development report.
Page 31
Page 32
Site suitability report S54SK Appendices
Appendices
Page 33
Site suitability report S54SK Appendices
Page 34
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 1
Appendix 1 Sources of information Engineering

Traffic Management and Access Roads/Rail URS Scott Wilson Access River BMT Isis Services (Utilities) and Third Party Assets Thames Tunnel and utility companies Geology British Geological Society and Thames Tunnel Construction and Operational Layout Template Thames Tunnel Site selection background technical paper Thames Tunnel
Planning
London Borough of Southwark Core Strategy (adopted 6 April 2011) Saved policies from the Southwark Plan, the London Borough of Southwark Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2007 London Plan 2011
Environment
Transport Map of Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) www.tfl.gov.uk Bus Route Maps: North-east, north-west, south-west, south-east www.tfl.gov.uk Crossrail Plans www.crossrail.co.uk/crossrail-bill-documents PTAL scores Obtained from Table 2.3 information Thames Path map www.walklondon.org.uk Capital Ring www.walklondon.org.uk Cycle Routes www.sustrans.org.uk and Local Cycling Guides 1-14 Design Manual for Roads and Bridge TD 42/95, Highways Agency
Archaeology Historic Environment data from Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service (GLAAS) National Monuments Record for some additional information regarding registered historic parks and gardens London Archaeological Archive and Research Centre (LAARC) Local authority websites Bing maps
Appendix 1 Page 1
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 1 Built heritage and townscape Local authority lists of Locally Listed Buildings National Monuments Record for some additional information regarding registered historic parks and gardens Unitary development plan and DPDs Local authority websites Bing maps
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Local authority details of unlicensed abstractors Environment Agency abstraction licence details Environment Agency groundwater levels and contour maps (2009-11) Environment Agency water quality (surface water and groundwater) Environment Agency Groundwater Source Protection Zones Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Envirocheck British Geological Survey (BGS) logs BGS 1:50,000 Geological Sheets Solid and Drift Editions (England and Wales) BGS Geology of London Special Memoir for 1:50,000 Geological sheets 256 (North London), 257 (Romford), 270 (South London) and 271 (Dartford) (England and Wales) Crossrail (2005) Assessment of Water Impacts Technical Report: Appendix C Baseline Data. Figure C.4: Extent of Saline Intrusion based on 177 mg/l *5mmol/l) Isochlor
Ecology Thames Estuary Partnership (2002) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan London Biodiversity Action Plan www.lbp.org.uk Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) www.magic.gov.uk - statutory designated sites London Wildweb wildweb.london.gov.uk - non-statutory site of importance for nature conservation Black redstart distribution in London www.blackredstarts.org.uk/ pages/.html National Biodiversity Network http://searchnbn.net - distribution of protected species Google Maps aerial views of habitat features BAP habitats www.natureonthemap.org.uk
Appendix 1 Page 2
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 1 Priority habitats and species on national and local scales www.ukbap.org.uk
Flood risk Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Environment Agency National Flood and Coastal Defence Database Envirocheck
Air quality Local authority websites London Air Quality Network www.londonair.org.uk Defra UK-AIR, air quality information resource www.airquality.co.uk Defra Air Quality Management Areas http://aqma.defra.gov.uk Defra Local Air Quality Management http://laqm.defra.gov.uk
Noise Envirocheck Identification of receptors Promap Calculation of distances between site and receptors Multimap Aerial photography www.multimap.co.uk Defra noise maps Identification of existing noise levels
Land quality Google Maps/Earth Site walkover information Envirocheck Data Sheets provided as a GIS Database British Geological Survey (BGS) logs
Socio-economic and community

Statistics from the Office of National Statistics 2001 Census data
Property
Mouchel referencing data Rating records from VOA Website Promap Multimap/Live maps
Appendix 1 Page 3
Appendix 1 Page 4
Appendix 2 Site location plan
Appendix 2 Page 1
FI D
EN
TI AL
TOWER HAMLETS
&
Area of Main Map
Legend
AF
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Site
S54SK
0 25 50
100
150
200
Metres
SOUTHWARK
Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. Crown copyright and database right 2011. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345 CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way. Map Ref : ............................ 1PL04-SS-02028 Date : .................................. 2011/10/27 Projection : .......................... British National Grid
Thames Water Utilities
The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Title:
This is an indicative working draft plan which has been produced for the purpose of confidential discussions only. Accordingly, the draft plan must not be copied, distributed or shown to any third party without the express written permission of Thames Water Utilities Limited. It provides an indication of sites that, following discussions with local authorities and other stakeholders, may be confirmed as being on the shortlist of construction sites for the proposed Thames Tunnel. Inclusion of a site on this draft plan should not be taken to mean that such site will be selected as a construction site to form part of the Thames Tunnel scheme.
APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN S54SK SITE
Appendix 3 Planning and environment plans
Appendix 3 Page 1
TI AL
! !
! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! !
! ! !
! ! !
EN
!
FI D
TOWER HAMLETS
! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
T RO
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
ER H!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
HIT
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
T EE ! TR ! ES
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
0 15 30
C YCHU R ST MAR
Area of Main Map
C
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
&
Legend
H STRE
AF
ET
HA EP EL
NT
NE LA
BERMONDSEY WALL EAST
! ! ! ! !
CATH
F FUL
T AY S REE T
OW FL AY M
EET STR ORD
S54SK ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
SOUTHWARK
T WES LAN
! !
U BR
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
L NE
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
01 ! A1
!
RO
AD !
60 Metres
RU
CK PA
E ST !ADIS ! ! PAR
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
REE
! ! ! ! ! !
O BI AL
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
R ST N ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
T EE
!
90
120
ER
This is an indicative working draft plan which has been produced for the purpose of confidential discussions only. Accordingly, the draft plan must not be copied, distributed or shown to any third party without the express written ! an indication ! ! !sites!that, ! ! discussions ! ! ! local ! authorities ! ! and ! other ! stakeholders, ! ! ! ! confirmed ! !as being ! ! the ! ! of ! ! ! sites !for the ! ! permission of Thames Water Utilities Limited. It provides of following with may be on shortlist construction proposed Thames Tunnel. Inclusion of a site on this draft plan should not be taken to mean that such site will be selected as a construction site to form part of the Thames Tunnel scheme.
CHERR Y GARD EN STR EET
ST
R ST
ET RE
T EE
UN PT NE
ES TR
WE LO
OAD ! A AD !A R ! !RO ! JAMAIC JAMAIC

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
0 20 A!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
T EE
Legend
RR D OA
RK ROAD SOUTHWARK PA
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! Protected/Strategic ! ! ! ! ! Strategic ! !View ! ! !
Protected Shopping Frontages

! Views
Thames Policy Area Action Areas

! ! ! !
Wider ! Consultation ! ! ! Zone !

! ! M OO D! K ! ! ! ! ! !
W LO ER
!
!
RO
!
AD
Areas ! Strategic ! !Cultural ! ! !

!
! ! ! Areas of! Opportunity
EE ! ST R
! !
Air Quality Management Areas
E! ET
!
Title:
APPENDIX 3A PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT PLAN S54SK SITE
W LO
ER
RO
AD
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
EN
TI AL
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
FI D
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ET ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
&
E TR ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! S !! E! H T I ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !RH ! ! ! ! ! E TH ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! RO! ! ! ! ! ! !
TOWER HAMLETS
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! !
C YCHU R ST MAR
Area of Main Map
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! !
! !
AF
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Legend
H STRE
ET
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
HA EP EL
NT
NE LA
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
CATH T AY S REE T
F FUL EET STR ORD
OW FL AY M
S54SK
SOUTHWARK
T WES
S A DI PAR E ST REE
BR
UN
EL
01 A1
O BI AL N
RO
AD
T EE
0 15 30
60 Metres
RU CK PA
90
120
ER
CHERR Y GARD EN STR EET
ST
R ST T EE
R ST
ET RE
LAN E
UN PT NE ES TR
WE LO
JAMAIC
D A ROA AICA ROAD JAM
00 A2
T EE
Legend
Metropolitan Open Land District Parks
RR D OA
RK ROAD SOUTHWARK PA
Sites of Metropolitan ! ! ! Nature Conservation Importance
W LO
! !
! ! ! !
Sites of Nature Conservation Importance Borough Open Land Open Space

AD
MO OD K EE ST R
ER
! !
RO
Flood Risk Zone 3 Flood Risk Zone 2

ER RO AD W LO
EE T
Title:
APPENDIX 3B PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT PLAN S54SK SITE
TI AL
!
ET RE
EN
FI D
TOWER HAMLETS
! ! !ROTHER
C YCHUR ST MAR
HE HIT
ST
! ! ! ! ! !
Area of Main Map
AF T
! ! ! !
HA EP EL
! !
&
Legend
ET H STRE
!
E
! !
NT N LA
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
CATH
D FOR FUL
ET TRE AY S
OW FL AY M
S54SK
SOUTHWARK
TL WES
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! R !EE !T
BR
UN
EL
01 A1
N O BI AL
RO
AD
!
ST ET RE
0 15 30
60 Metres
RU
S TR
CK PA
90
120
ER
JAMAIC
SOUTHWAR K PA
D A ROA AICA ROAD JAM
A2 00
! ! This is an indicative working draft plan which has been produced for the purpose of confidential discussions only. Accordingly, the draft plan must not be copied, distributed or shown to any third party without the express written permission of Thames Water Utilities Limited. It provides an indication of sites that, following discussions with local authorities and other stakeholders, may be confirmed as being on the shortlist of construction sites for the proposed Thames Tunnel. Inclusion of a site on this draft plan should not be taken to mean that such site will be selected as a construction site to form part of the Thames Tunnel scheme.
CHERR Y GARD EET EN STR
EET
R ST
ST ET RE
T EE
E! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! DIS A PAR
ST
ANE
RK ROAD
U PT NE NE R ST
Legend
RR WE LO D OA
T EE
Listed Building (point)
W LO
Archaeological Areas M OO DK Conservation Area EE ST Registered Historic Parks and Gardens RE ET ! ! Scheduled Monument
W LO ER AD RO
Listed Building (polygon)
ER
AD RO
APPENDIX 3C PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT HERITAGE PLAN S54SK SITE
Title:
Appendix 4 Photographs of the site and surroundings
Appendix 4 Page 1
FI D
EN
TI AL
TOWER HAMLETS
&
Area of Main Map
Legend
AF
S54SK
0 25 50
100
150
200
Metres
SOUTHWARK
Title:
APPENDIX 4 AERIAL PLAN S54SK SITE
View of the site looking north towards the River Thames.
View of the site looking south from the Thames Path.
Appendix 4 Page 3
View of the childrens playground located in the central area of the park and looking west.
View of St Peter and the Guardian Angels RC Church looking east along Paradise Street.
Appendix 4 Page 4
Looking east along Jamaica Road, with the site to the left.
Looking into the site from the entrance on Jamaica Road.
Appendix 4 Page 5
Looking south towards the site from the mound within the northern part of Kings Stairs Gardens.
Appendix 4 Page 6
Appendix 5 Transport plan
Appendix 5 Page 1
FI D
EN
TOWER HAMLETS
TI AL
&
Area of Main Map
Legend
AF
Local Authority Boundary Transport Access Route TfL Road Network Thames Path
London Cycle Routes
0 10 20 40 60 80 100
S54SK
Metres
SOUTHWARK
Title:
APPENDIX 5 TRANSPORT PLAN/ SOUTHERN OPTION S54SK SITE
e
e s ou H e l 10 ab t y o t S bat 1 om r B ou C 20
G y r na an r 3
4
s r e h c r A t r u o C
5
3 0 1
B F
1
6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
o t
Princes Stairs
Jetty
7 9 o t 3 9
Status:
o t
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
1 to 19
y t t e J
6 1
0 1
e s u o H s e c n i r P
3.2m
East India Court
9 5
1
8
THIS DRAWING
25m ID SHAFT
3.1m
1 to 13
Shingle
Kings Stairs
Ceylon Wharf
Ivory Wharf
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2011. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
2 1
G N I K
E S O L C S R I A T S
o t
1 1
3 2
H P LE E N A
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
T
N LA E
5 2
1 0 1
3.9m
4 o1 1t
The Angel (PH)
PH
3
3 9t o4 7
o 8t 1 0 3
2 3
4.2m
El Sub Sta
8 4
s t s o P
1 5
Playground
M t S
W e l t t Co
y a
2 6
14
8 o t
SITE BOUNDARY AREA
6 1 1 1
3 1
E H DT R A W D GE WS E N I K DM R I H T
4 o1 1t
9 1
3 2
T E E R T ES S I D A R A P
3.6m
BS
Gardens
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL
10 m
40 m
SCALE 1 : 500
P a t h
Nursery
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
JSHE
EPER
PSTV
30/09/2011
T r a i n i n g C e n t r e
Hall
h c r u h C ) e t a v i r P (
Pynfolds
1 8 2
J A M A I C A
R O A D
Location Code: OS Reference:
3.2m
an d
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3479
UBR
Sub Process:
JYAS
LONDON TIDEWAY TUNNELS
WASTE 5 0
Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:
Site Name: Project Name:
S54SK - KING STAIRS GARDENS
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
D A O AR C I A M A J
Christ Church Gate
41 52
Drawing Title:
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN S54SK - MAIN

29
Drawing No.:
4 5 2
PLOTTED ON
04/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_4\dms04380\100-DE-TRA-S54SK-835101.dgn
40 51
c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008
100-DE-TRA-S54SK-835101
30
SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
r af t
PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE DIVERSION ROUTE
Location / Town:
SOUTHWARK
1:500
A1
AA
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
C
1t o4
s r e t e P t S e h T d n a s l e g n A n a i d r a u G h c r u h CC R
2 7
e h T n o i s s Mi
3.1m
King Stairs
2 2
o t
8 3
e t a t s E s y r a
o t
1 2
1 a
3 0 1 o t 0 6
0 5 2
CP
3 3
NOTES TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW: 1. PARTIAL CLOSURE OF THAMES PATH, PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE DIVERSION PROVIDED.
NT HA EP EL E AN L
2.9m
PROVISIONAL DURATIONS: MAIN SITE - 7 YEARS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT - 7 YEARS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PHASES - 1
3 4
T S M R A
FO R FUL ET TRE DS
C Y H U R C H
e s u y Ho a h t Ca
1 o t
o 1t 4 2
7
LEGEND
s t s Po
LO F Y A
AREA OF ROAD/FOOTWAY CLOSURE
HAY CAT EET STR
W R E R T S T E E
EXCAVATION TEMPORARY WORKS
ed t i Un
1 o t 8
SITE WORKING AREA
e us Ho
m i gr l Pi H e s ou
TRAFFIC DIVERSION ROUTE
h t Pa
CONSTRUCTION ROUTE
y b s e Pr
BUS STOP
e
e s ou H e l 10 ab t y o t S bat 1 om r B ou C 20
G y r na an r 3
4
s r e h c r A t r u o C
5
3 0 1
B F
1
6
o t
Princes Stairs
Jetty
7 9 o t 3 9
Status:
o t
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
1 to 19
y t t e J
6 1
0 1
3.2m
East India Court
9 5
1
8
THIS DRAWING
25m ID SHAFT
3.1m
1 to 13
Shingle
Kings Stairs
Ceylon Wharf
Ivory Wharf
2 1
G N I K
E S O L C S R I A T S
o t
1 1
3 2
H P LE E N A
T
N LA E
5 2
1 0 1
3.9m
4 o1 1t
The Angel (PH)
PH
3
3 9t o4 7
o 8t 1 0 3
2 3
4.2m
El Sub Sta
8 4
s t s o P
1 5
Playground
M t S
W e l t t Co
y a
2 6
14
8 o t
SITE BOUNDARY AREA
6 1 1 1
3 1
4 o1 1t
9 1
3 2
3.6m
BS
Gardens
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL
10 m
40 m
CONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
SCALE 1 : 500
P a t h
Nursery
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
JSHE
EPER
PSTV
30/09/2011
Hall
Pynfolds
1 8 2
J A M A I C A
R O A D
3.2m
an d
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3479
UBR
Sub Process:
JYAS
WASTE 5 0
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
Christ Church Gate
41 52
Drawing Title:
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN S54SK - INTERMEDIATE + CSO

29
Drawing No.:
4 5 2
PLOTTED ON
04/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_2\dms04380\100-DE-TRA-S54SK-835102.dgn
40 51
100-DE-TRA-S54SK-835102
30
r af t
Location / Town:
SOUTHWARK
1:500
A1
AA
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
C
1t o4
2 7
e h T n o i s s Mi
3.1m
PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE CROSSING
King Stairs
2 2
o t
8 3
e t a t s E s y r a
o t
1 2
1 a
3 0 1 o t 0 6
0 5 2
CP
3 3
NOTES TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW: 1. PARTIAL CLOSURE OF THAMES PATH AND ROUTES WITHIN PARK, PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE DIVERSION PROVIDED. CONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ACROSS SITE EGRESS.
NT HA EP EL E AN L
2.9m
2.
3 4
PROVISIONAL DURATIONS: MAIN SITE - 7 YEARS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT - 7 YEARS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PHASES - 1
T S M R A
FO R FUL ET TRE DS
C Y H U R C H
e s u y Ho a h t Ca
1 o t
o 1t 4 2
7
LEGEND
s t s Po
LO F Y A
AREA OF ROAD/FOOTWAY CLOSURE
HAY CAT EET STR
W R E R T S T E E
EXCAVATION TEMPORARY WORKS
ed t i Un
1 o t 8
SITE WORKING AREA
e us Ho
TRAFFIC DIVERSION ROUTE
h t Pa
CONSTRUCTION ROUTE
y b s e Pr
BUS STOP
Appendix 6 Services and geology plan
Appendix 6 Page 1
EW BR
1
e s u y Ho b h g u o l l Wi
5 30
2
9118
3
3 1
4
1
5 N
6
Status:
e s u rHo e v u o c n Va
HO E US
WO
2 1t o2 8
St Johns Churchyard
6103
Presby
IL-1.28m
x 9 1 2 1
PI ER HE AD
7110
0 6 5 2
7003
229
1 00m m
5719
New Tower Buildings

0 o2 1t
9002
1 5 0 m m
4 3t o5 5
7006
6951
b 0 1 1
3 0 5
6003
1 to 41
Club
8001
2351
SE
6002 5 STEPS
Dundee Court
1 to 40
229
m m 0 5 1
0 1 1
TCB
IL-1.16m
Wapping Pier Head

PI ER HE AD
LB SE
3" ME TE RE D
6" FI RE 6" FI RE
Pierhead Wharf
re 00mm Fi 1
2555
2" ME TE 305 RE D
2400
IL-1m
Sub Sta
7004 SE
IL-0.61m
6 "
7 2
1 2 1 9 x 8 1 3
5001 SE
IL-0.64m
x 9 1 2 1
3 1 8
" 6
8 9 0 0 1 2 0 1
VT CL4.35m
7 3
Morocco
Wharf
101 to 502
3.9m
229
Olivers Wharf
1 to 5
6454
FB
7 4
The Sanctuary
77
7005
3"
4"
79
2"
6" FI RE
6" FI RE
Orient Wharf
M e a n H i g h Wa t e r
Wapping Old Stairs
Sand and shingle
Me a nH i g hW a t e r
Shingle Police Boat Yard
3 2 1
1 2 1
Posts
1045
M S
3
" 5
PH FB
U p p e r P o o l
y t t e J
7 1 1
T E E R T S
SM
o9 1t
" 4
3.6m
5 0 3
E H T I H R E H T O R
N TU
8 1
"
Princes Stairs
Jetty
7 9 o t 3 9
9 o t 1 w e N s r e h c r A t r u o C
" 9
3 0 1
NF
B F
1031
1803
1802
1 to 19
3.4m
m m 0 0 1
0707
5 2 2
3.2m
1704
" 7
8
1 8 3
Cherry Garden Pier
Shingle
Kings Stairs
0702
Shingle
National Wharf
r e t Wa h g i H n a e M
" 5
9702
" 9
9705 A B A N D A B O A N N E D O D N E D PS SU
2705
WO
2"0" DEEP
0709
Wharf
4
s t s o P
5" 3"6" FK
2 1
S R I A T GS N I K
Ivory
Posts
m m E 225 0 S 0 O 1 L C
WO
5 2 2
1702
Ceylon Wharf
1 8 3
>
1032
3
1 to 13
6
ZBV506094
3 2
1035
The Angel (PH)
1 0 1
8701 FB 8705
DM04452
o 8t 1 0 3
WATERING POINT
HV HV
9701
4 o1 1t
Wharf DW
Cherry Garden Stairs
W D
" " 5 4
P "H 9
3 9t o4 7
Corbetts
ABANDONED 0716
PH
3
9 2 2
DW 3.9m
381
0705
The Old Mortuary

O T 9 2 2 M O R F
2702 WO
5 0 3
1 8 3
1 8 3
FB
1 2"
1 t o 7 7
1050
1701
D E N O D N A B A
Play Area
5
N a t i o n a l T e r r a c e
FB
10
9 2 2
7703
" 4 P "H 9
9 2 2
1 3
5702
1321
6 5 1
6701
PS
305
4.0m
5 0 3
8 4
8706 8703 8704 SE
0708
1 2 t o 2 2
1 1 o t 1
IL0.77m 9703
ABANDONED
D
LH
s t s o P
0714
9 2 2
o5 1t
M t S
Playground
3 9
5 2 2
WO
1 o t
2 6
3 81
E T T O P
3.1m
T E E mT R m 0 0 YS 1 R
1036
43 1 1
6601
W e 0605 l t t Co
2
y a
ABANDONED
14
2 3 t o 3 0
1019
1 3 o t
8 o t
7"
0603
5 2 2
6602
WO
4 o5 9t 3
m m 0 0 1
E H DT R WA D GE WS E N I M K D R I H T
1 8
WO
9602
8602
0604
5 2 2
ABANDONED
1 8 3
2 6 7
ABANDONED 0602
989
El Sub Sta
2.2m
1602
>
1039
ABANDONED
5 0 3
WO
1026
4 o1 1t
3 4 1 1
8605
1055
P mH m 0 5 4
I L 0 . 3 2 m
1 8 3
9 1
3 2
SU
x
3 4 1 1
2 6 7
9601 SE
7 7
8601
3.6m
5 0 3
22 5
3.0m
7604
22 5
Nursery
8604
0613
1605
" 2
7603
1t o8
5 3
4 2 o t 1
3.9m
e s u o H n o t r u B
y e l l A s n o x i D
6 "
6502
MH
1 3
305
82
7 3
->
982
5504 WO
" 6
e g a s s a P n r u o b n a r C
100mm
3.2m
0502
1 8 2
5505
LAID JULY "67

6 o t 1
225
War Meml
WO
8506
VT
1041
5 6 x 9
" 2 1
R WE E D S L E I F F U D
4"
6"
5"
5 2 2
" 3
WO
43 1 1
7510
H
BD
" 4
" 2 1
21 31 42
1504
VT
) N O I T C E S 5 6 8 1
30
IL-2.92m
305
->
5 2
30 0m m
6 o1 1t
18
3.2m
7501
SE
8503
37
46 25 36 47
16
4"
5"
7"
991 1 "
62 x 7
3"
3.4m
ABANDONED
300ABANDONED
38
4 "
t o 14 ou r t
y l es
I L 2 . 4 8 m
6"
1 2"
4"
EE T
38
0 o7 1t
ST R
Air Shaft
m 3 0 . 0 L I
1
3403
2
9
3
0 1
EP TU
8402
1402
Blick House
1 1
---->
6402
7402
8403
4 "
4 "
7401
7 1 o t 0 1
0401
WO 1405
o t
21
WO
FB ABANDONED
6 5
2"
1407
H P
6405
7403
4 "
Play
SU
38
Area
3 0 0
" 3
PLOTTED ON
02/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_2\dms04380\100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100101.dgn
e h t i h r e h t o R
SEE DRG MPH.3567/79
9 2 2
3402
1 8
1 1
2.5m
e e r F
ZBV505928
1 9
Square
2 o7 5t 6
1 2
ZBV030817 WO
5 "
h c r u h C
4 "
13
3.5m
IL0.38m
20
WO
New Place
S T R E E T
0 7 1 1
057
1102
WO
M O O D K E E
14
6 1 9
LAID JAN 80
Assembly Hall
2403
" 4
5 1 8
ZBV083003
c i n i n Cl o x n Di h o J
229
8404
2 2 5
g g e l C
Court
e s u o H
Edmonton
5 0 3
WO
229
6710
2
2
Drawing Title:
3404
" 4
3405
o t
0 8
a i b m t u n l i o C Po
SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN S54SK

Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:
" 3
100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100101
1091
1 3
Surgery
LB
8 0 1 o t 2 1 4 0 1 o t 5 3
4 6 o t 7 5
1126
5 o2 8t 1
6 1 o1 9t 0 2 1 o5 3t 4
IL1.11m
m m 0 0 1 88.6 METRES
0 B 8 E F
1029
WO
1 4 5
D A O NR Y R R E P
4 1
3"
1 5
O R
1 6 7
6 3 1 o t 9 2 2 9 1 o t 5 8
9 1 o1 1t 7
G N I L L U C
D I A M L 5 5
8 3
0 0
o t
D A
WO
1410
1 7 8
1110
2401
M u r d 1 o t c o h 1 2 H o u s e
2 1
9 2 2
THAMES TUNNEL
WO
Niagara Court
4 "
2 2 9
Contract Name:
3406
WO

9
r af t
1 8
8 6 1
WO
I L 0 . 3 4 m
3 0 5
1404
3401
Location / Town:
SOUTHWARK
1:1250
A1
AB
5 0
9" 4"
2 8 1
UNABLE TO LIFT LID
6404
0 0 6
0 8 1
8 7 1
D L E I F F U D
" 4
7" HP
Hall
2.6m
3
1403
t ep o t un 12 e H ou s e
8 0 2 o t 4 8 1
4 2 5 1 R WE E S
" 9
6401
) w o l e B s p o h S (
0 1 2
VT
6 1 0 x 1
FB
) N O I T C E D S A 6 O 6 8 1 R R WE O L (
" 3
8401 WO
3"
AV
2.6m
WO
" 3
Memorial Garden
1239
1411
6709
7
6
" 3
1
o t
0 8
an d
Scotia Court
2402
BS
" 2 1
" 4
ABANDONED
38
2507
381
1 1
SE
DBV005228
a i t o c S
9
3 1
WO
P " H 9
Kirby Estate
305
" 3
>
n e d r a G IL0.48m
I L 1 . 1 m
Centre
8 4 4 1
TCB
LUL JUBILEE LINE
City Business
2505
0 1
s B C T
Southwark Park
Memorial
A D
3 8 1
t r u o C
37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

Location Code:
a n i g t e i n R o P
OS Reference:
WO TML4/22
5 6 x 9
KENT 3000
5 1
WO
0 7 o t 1
s P B H C T m m 0 5 4
IL-1.05m
WM
>
305
7504
1027 " 9
305
0509 W E R R O
300
L O
AB A
13
4 2 2 o t 2 1 2
DM04171
7506
" 4
48
PH
24 35
2 1
4 3 2
5 2 2 " 2 1
e s u o mH a e r t s l l i M
Southwark Park
0 0 3
N ED N DO ABA
0512
26
1085
21
6 15
to
FH
8 4 4 1
34 45
6 1
6 3 2 8 3 2
UNABLE TO LIFT LID 7502
7508 SE
0 2
8501
44
0 1
5 6 x 9
1028
8 4 2 0 5 2
23
38
MH
2504
Offices
STS
40 51
84
33
Court
KENT 3000
4 5 2
BS
Estate
Calgary
House
Council
2 x 76
VT
BD
2 2 5
" 4
5 30
2 1
WM
2 x 76
29
8 1
Christ Church Gate
22
987
8504
Irwell
44 1 8
3505
1 to 80 Regina Point
225
3506
The Point, 7th Floor,
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
4402
TQ3479
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
Project Group:

4"
225
WASTE
1 0 0
Trotwood
1 7
WO
5 2 2 P m H m 0 5 4 P H m m 0 0 3
5 2 2
52
0 3
0506
305
22 32 43
0 1
D A O AR C I A M A D L J E I F F U
372 1
D A O R R WE O L R ( WE E S
30 0
1501
41
El Sub Sta
a b o t t i r n u a o M C
m u P
0501
ABANDONED
5 2 2
ABA N NDO
0511
2509
0 m
e s u o H e i l y a M
WO
6503
6 2 o t 1
990 " 3
7503
8 4 4 1
WO
" 2 1
5 2 2
2503
3 0 1 o t 0 6
" 3
El Sub Sta
x 68 6
6448
179yds OF 6"
8505
SE STS
WO " 2 WO
22 5
) N O I T C E D S A O R R WE O L (
5 6 8 1
0513
" 9
3501
1 4
6708
43
2510
3504
Chy
2 4
10
3 "
P mH m 0 5 5 4 2 2 P mH m 0 0 3
1042
J A M A I C A
9502
WO
R O A D
0504
5 2 2 " 9
1 1 1
2502
5 0 3
ZBV505989 WO
2506
7t o3 3
P H
2 1
IL-0.44m
Pynfolds
372 1
SE
0508
" 7 " 4
" 4
3502
DBV005291 SE
6 1
1 e s u n Ho e d r yGa r r e Ch
WO
9501
300mm HP WO
PCs
8 4 4 1
5 0 3
5 0 3
1503
WO
2508
1 3
3 05
o t
e s u o H
e s o l C
on f i de nt i al
0505 " 2 1
1086
3 05
0 7
" 9
1025
8 1 1 6
9 5 o t 7 2
7507
450mm HP
5 0503 2 1043 5 6 x 9 2
1502
S T S O Q LA U A V R S E
4 1 9 x
PH
5 0 3
2 7 3 1
N DO S RI
T E RE T S
3503
O F N E R
AA
7
DRAFT - FRIST ISSUE
RS
DS
CH
24/07/2009
" 4
b u S l E
a t S
7 o t 9
1 5 0
Hall
3000K
H T R
o t
986
9 1
7 5 4
4 7 5
D E N O D N A B A
2605
7602
BR
Training Centre
86 x 6
1601
1238
80mm WM
2 2
7601
I L 1 . 6 6 m
4 2
El Sub Sta
5 0 3
P a t h
" 4
0 2
s v a h l c O r t u h S C
5 2 2
6 2
" 9
22 5
WO
1038
1079
8 2
1021
6 7 o t 6 6
" 0609 7
0 3
5 0 3 D E N O D N A B A
x
I L 1 . 4 8 m
0614
" 7
2 3
" 3
" 3
E AN L ST WE
5 0 3
" 7 5 5 4
4
4 3
" 9
8603
" 7
o 7t 3
0606
5 2 2
1607
1609
2601
King Stairs
5 30
0615
m 2 . 0
P H " 9
5
1 o t
Gardens
43 1 1
0612
4 4
2 7
e h T n o i s s Mi
3.1m
0601
A B A N D O N E D
1 8 3
2 2 5
4"
3
2"2"DEEP
9
n o d s i R
e s u o H
R EN
7
3
05
" 3
2 5
d n a e y r r t a n r e b i C L c c i i l v b " i C u 7 P "
1078
PH
2607
6 5
" 3 WO
43 1 1
Estate
3 1
WO
D E R E T E M
ELECTRICITY
- HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES - LARGE BANKS OF LOW VOLTAGE CABLES - LOW PRESSURE ABOVE 300mm DIAMETER - INTERMEDIATE, MEDIUM OR HIGH PRESSURE
" 3
GAS
3601
10 m
0 SCALE 1 : 1250
100 m
Pond
WO
P o s t s
4 6 o t 1
Revision History
n o t l y e A t a t s E
1087
Iss Description Dsgnr Chkd Appd Date
T E E R T S
3602
2
1084
AB
DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE
REVI PSTV
DARD
27/11/2009
2 0 0 mm
"
985
WO
1t o4
5 5 o t
5 6
5604 T E E R T YS R E T T O P
6 1
" 7
62 x 7
5 "
43 1 1
m m 0 0610 0 1
5 2 2
ABANDONED
ZBV030816
Millpond
1 1
" 2
S54SK
y b s e Pr
1040
0608
o t
" 3
1 2
2 2 9
o t
8 3
984
w n r Co e s u Ho
2 2
4 5 1
m m 0 0 1
4 4 1
m m 0 0 1
2 7 1
WO
FB
IL1.64m
ZBV030845
d o wo g n i l l Co e s u Ho
988
P "H 9
1024
4 3 o1 0t 3 1
IL2.26m 1023
El Sub Sta
D 0 NE 0 3 DO N A B A ABANDONED
D E N O D N A B A
0710
o t
5 3
ABANDONED
1 NE 8 3 DO N A
e t a t s E s y r a
0717
C L 2 . 3 8 m
W k n a r F
m y h
s t s o P
5 2
3 5 0
W D
1 6
b u S l E a t S
3704
3703
1706
2703
" 5 m m 0 5 4 E
C I U L S
N L I K E M I -1.5m L E N I L
FB
1
1705
o t
3 2
2701
T E E R T S
5 6 8 1
IL1.64m
7701
7702
SU
1018
" 2
62 x 7
43 1 1
ABANDONED
A B
3
e s u o H k r a
9 2 2
E Z I S
4.3m
0 7 1
" 4
4.2m
229 BERMONDSEY WALL EAST
229
9 2 2
4.4m
1 a
H P
4.2m
8702
SYNTHETIC GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DERIVED FROM THE BGS LONDON LITHOFRAME50 MODEL, HISTORICAL BOREHOLES AND BERRY (1979). PLEASE NOTE, GROUND CONDITIONS MAY VARY AND THIS DATA SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DETAILED ENGINEERING PURPOSES 2
M E T R E R I A E
1
3
2 3
1703
2.9m
S E I R A
o t
0 0
-3.1m
5 6
LB
1074
1077
5 0 3
N I A M
O I B L A
5288
Chy
WO
2 2 9
1054
1604
4 "
1083
2
2 9
2603
2.9m
2604
e h h s s T i n n n e n i o F m i a s e s S M i 33
IL-2.27m
" 9
P H
m i r P l o n o o i h c b l S A y r a
1075 WO WO
5 0 3
BS
2606
LB
1606
1608 2602
TCB
3
05
7 1
45
0 7
3.1m
2 7
7 8
O N E D 0712
9 5
o t
6 1
1049
Rectory
4 4
0 7
y t t e J
0 1
e s u o H s e c 0711 n i r A B P A N D
9
East India Court
" 7 ST
H C 5 R 0 U 3 H C Y R A M
T E E R T S
1 2 1
o t
5 4 1
" 6
The
m a d A
s n e d r a
e t a t s E
2704
0 2 1
5 0 3
o t
P H
B F
8 8
a 3 0 1
1048
8 0
7 8
1t o1 6
IL-0.79m VT CL4.22m IL-0.82m
4.3m
T E E R T HS G I GH N I P P WA
IL-0.94m
Old Aberdeen Wharf

T E E R T S ) H C N A R B
n o i t a t eS c i l o P
W h g i H n a e M
r e t a
MP
Wapping Pier
MP
s d r a l l o B
FS
Waterside Gardens
N O I S R VE I D R WE E S
H G I H (
Sand and shingle

r e Pi
Police Boat Yard
G N I P P WA
E G A N I A R D
Wapping New Stairs

Sand and shingle
m a l h o T o r P e r v e i w R o
L
s e
Base of Lambeth Group 79(m OD + 100)
Shingle Shingle
Shingle
Navigation Light
Base of Thanet Sand Formation 64(m OD + 100)

e l g n i h S
w l ai
Pier
(fixed green)
Lift
y d B t s n o C o r o B
FS
W L C C
Pontoon
s e m a h T l r o e o v i P R r e w o L
w o L n a e M W r e t a
Church Stairs
hW g i nH a Me
r e t a
W D
sW m a r d n 1 3 a r 1 B o t
7 2 1
7 4 o t 1
f r a h
Suggested invert level of shaft 51.86(m OD + 100)

0 0 3
4.0m
2901
e l g n i h S
ZBV030808 1. LIMITED
s e m a h T r e v i R
y d BB &L t s n o C y l s A L G , t s n o C o r o B
l o o P r e w o L
SITE BOUNDARY
" 4
1801
3 1 1
1046
t f a h S r i A
s t s Po
W L C C
Wks
e d i s r e 6 v i o t R 1
s B F
0 5 1
WO 1047
Play Ground
P "H 9
9 0 1
m u e s u M l e 9 n u 2 r 2 B e h T
2803
Crane
9 2 2
" 4
2802 SU
WO
2801
s y r a M t S h c r u h C
1804
9 2 2
D A O R L E N N U T
Walter Langley
Posts
RE
2.7m
2804 IL-1.63m
Posts
9 2 2
Chalk
3 8 1
4 9
81
6 9
7 5
2559
6 0 1
4 0 1
6 4
VT
1 5 0 m 4.1m m DBV475029
PH
7231
" 5
4.3m
VT
6 9
El
CL4.35m
8 0 1
5 STEPS
H P
2 1 1
Waterside Gardens
8 1 1
m 9 . 3
King Henrys Wharves
King Henrys Stairs
0 2 1
4.3m
8
3 1 8
Mud
6 2
m m 0 5 1
o t
Ps
E C A L P
4 2 1
7107
1 o3 1t
4 1
RC Church
m m 0 0 1
4"
229
E AN L
5 o2 1t
3"
N SCA
TT DRE
GEOLOGY
305
4"
0 30
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
w l ai
N
DUNDEE STREET
nd ou gr er nd
mm 00 1
PATH REARDO N
STREET
2
m ha T
305
es
ay
DRAWING LOCATION Ground level 104(m OD + 100)
l ne un T
6"
1 0
305
1 1
mm 50
2"
97(m OD + 100) Base of Made Ground and Superficial EAST LONDON LINE (THAMES TUNNEL)
4"
3"
4& ah a l f
ds ar l l Bo
3 75
1t o 4 4
w e s u Ca y a
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE
U
M HW
y wa e s u Ca
EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME. COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO THE TUNNEL DATUM
5 1
nd ou gr er nd
m ha T es
R ay
l ne un T
WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
m m 0
NOTES FIBRE OPTIC AND BT COMMUNICATION CABLES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. DETAILS OF THESE CABLES AND OTHER SERVICES AND THIRD PARTY ASSETS TO BE CONFIRMED BY FURTHER STUDIES AND UTILITY SEARCHES.
3"
4" RE FI
6 "
H ARYC ST M URCH ET STRE
05
"
2. INVERT LEVEL OF SHAFT SHOWN.BASE OF CONSTRUCTION WILL BE BELOW THIS LEVEL AND WILL DEPEND ON CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE. THIS IS ONLY PROVISIONAL AS DESIGN IS AT EARLY PRELIMINARY STAGE.
LR NE D OA
6"
2 8
LEGEND
FW FW
3"
FOUL WATER
y r na an r G 13 o he 1 t T
e s ou H e l 0 ab o 1 t y t S bat 1 om r B ou C
SW
SW
SURFACE WATER
1 o t
20
WB
CLEAN WATER
GAS
" 4
" a / n
s t s o P
CABTV
CABTV
FIBRE OPTICS
7
05
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
o t
1 1
s y d ar ar tM hy S c r hu
R E T T A
H P LE E N A
" 4
C I A
LV
LV
LOW VOLTAGE CABLES
> --
2 2 5
N LA E
R T S
3 81
ey nl He
T E E
5 2
mm 00 1
HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES
CP
e os Cl
A
N A B
3 3
2 9
EXISTING TUNNELS
O D E N D
R T S
T E E
NT HA EP EL
4 5 7
3"
381
A B A O D N
2 9 2
3 4
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
WATER - ALL TW ASSETS - ALL TW ASSETS
E N
"
B D A 1 NE O D N
E AN L
8 1
5"
6"
3"
T S
4"
"
C A L
d n u o r g r e d Un
HP
R A
o5 1t
FO R FUL
m 0 0 1
22
C Y
457
R T S
4"
H U
s i l l a
CR
T E E
1 5
43 1 1
2 x 76
2 x 76
305
ET TRE DS
D
O
2 1
STORM & FOUL SEWERS
y wa l i Ra
N D E
STREET
e s u y Ho a h t Ca
6 5 1
381
4 1
2 9 2
2 2
m 50m 1
o 1t
5 7
4" HP
43 1 1
4 2
s t s Po
OTHER SIGNIFICANT UTILITIES ARE DEFINED AS: TELECOMS - ONLY FIBRE OPTIC CABLES
LO F Y A
B
A
8 1
RU
3"
HAY CAT
->
CK PA
8 3
N
E
R E
4 "
R T S
ET RE ST
EET STR
x 2 76
T E E
H P
ed t i Un
1
o t
4 4 1
e us Ho
x 762
5"
3"
381
m i gr l Pi
0 30
5"
e s u s Ho s i r r Mo
H e s ou
" 4 05
h t Pa
3 y d dB r Wa
6"
05
2 o3 1t
5"
4 2
CHER D RY G AR
3 5 0
D GOL M ARI
o t
7"
H
FO R
61
TH
"
REET EN ST
05 3
2 76
0 2
x 762 43 1 1
R ST
2 4 o1 8t 6
3"
ET STRE
T EE
372 1
22
7 "
4 5 7
6 "
225
5 30
1 o t
4"
7"
3"
"2 5 x 76
1 4
43 1 1
2 5
ay Pl
5 30
6 o6 8t 3
3 05
ea Ar
6 o1 t
5 o t
U PT NE
2" 1 9" 4"
45 o t
e s u n Ho r u o b n a Cr
67
4"
NE
3"
2 2
5"
43 1 1
ET RE ST
6 o2 1t
"
5 30
OW L
00mm 1
2 1
86 x 6 BR
ER
ED
RO
45
RK O PA 4" T
o t
AD
PROSPECT
51
3"
18
x 96
4"
o t
62 x 7
43 1 1
5 4"
6 o2 1t
44
10
STREET
2 2
2"" 1 9 " 4
20
305
4"
N ED NDO
5"
43 1 1
0 0
SO UTHW RK RO AD ARK PA
305
2 2 5
8 1
7 1
3 0 0
6 1
5 1
4 1
300
e t a t y Es b r Ki
305
3 1
0 0
4"
" 4 22 9
3 "
2 2
300
5
m 0 0 1 m m 0 0 1
3
5 0
> --
3
00
0 30
4 "
d o wo t s e Pr
300
e s u Ho t n o f l a Ch
7 o2 1t
e s u Ho
2 5 2
2 1 "
Appendix 7 Construction phase layout
Appendix 7 Page 1
6
N
Status:
FOR INFORMATION
EXCAVATED MATERIALS LOADING JETTY
Keyplan:
N
a 3 0 1
7 9 o t 3 9
B F
NEW MATERIALS JETTY
3 0 1
B F
1 o t
THIS DRAWING
Princes Stairs
20
Jetty
1 to 19
y t t e J
6 1
EXCAVATED MATERIAL CONVEYOR
0 1
3.2m
East India Court
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS
ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER
MATERIAL CONVEYOR
1 to 13
STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
Shingle
Kings Stairs
8
25m I.D. SHAFT PRIMARY GANTRY CRANE
Ceylon Wharf
Ivory Wharf
2 1
E S O L C S R I A T S G N I K
o t 3 2
1 1
H P LE E N A T N LA
4
KEY:
5 2
W D
The Angel (PH)

1 0 1
PH
3
3 9t o4 7
o 8t 1 0 3
2 3
El Sub Sta
8 4
m 0 0 5 6
m 0 5 7
s t s o P
1 5
M t S
e t a t s E s y r a
Playground
2
m 0 0 5 4
W e l t t o C
y a
2 6
14
8 o t
6 1 1 1
2 2
m 0 0 0 1
m 0 0 5
SECONDARY CRANE
4 o1 1t
9 1
3 2
3.6m
3.0m
Nursery
P a t h
Hall
TEMPORARY WORKING 2 AREA= 21895m

9 5 o t 7 2
an d
SITE BOUNDARY AREA = 29448m
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3479
UBR
Sub Process:
JYAS

Location / Town:
WASTE 5 0
Site Name:
1 8 2
J A M A I C A R O A D
Project Name:
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
3.2m
El Sub Sta
3 0 1 o t 0 6
Drawing Title:
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT S54SK - SINGLE MAIN DRIVE

Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
11/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100002
r af t
Pynfolds
SOUTHWARK - -
1:500
A1
AC
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
E R T S E S I D A R A P
AB AA
DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
RS RS
DS DS
CH CH
24/07/2009 17/07/2009
1 5 0
T ACCESS E
2 7
e h T n o i s s Mi
3.1m
POWER SUPPLY
2
10 m
40 m
m 0 0 5 1
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
m 0 5 4
King Stairs Gardens
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AC
THIRD ISSUE
REVI PSTV
DARD
30/09/2011
2 0 0 mm
o t
1 2
1 a
4.2m
CP
1t o4
6500m
EXCAVATED MATERIAL, SLURRY PROCESSING AND SEPARATION PLANT, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA
3 3
3.9m
m 0 0 5
4500m
SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE, PRIMARY GANTRY CRANE, SEGMENT LOADING AREA AND SEGMENT STORAGE STOCKYARD
NT HA EP EL E AN L
3 4
500m GROUT BATCHING PLANT AND SILOS 1500m TBM WORKSHOP AND TUNNEL MAINTENANCE AREA
FO R FUL ET TRE DS
450m
TBM MATERIALS AND SPARES STORAGE AREA
1000m
PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING
e s u y Ho a h t Ca
750m
OFFICES AND WELFARE
1 o t
o 1t 4 2
500m
CANTEEN AND MEDICAL
s t s Po
LO F Y A
200m
POWER SUPPLY
HAY CAT EET STR
W R E R T S T E E
DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
ed t i Un
1 o t 8
e us Ho
h t Pa
y b s e Pr
3
y t t e J
4
1 to 19
6
Status:
0 1
6 1
3.2m
East India Court
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
3.1m
1 to 13
Shingle
A
Kings Stairs
Ceylon
Wharf
Ivory
DRAWING LOCATION
2 1
o t
1 1
3 2
H P LE E N A T
Wharf
25m I.D. SHAFT
N LA E
5 2
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 9095m 2
4 o1 1t
The Angel (PH)

1 0 1
3 9t o4 7
o 8t 1 0 3
PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE
2 3
PH
3
3 3
4.2m
m 0 0 2 1
El Sub Sta
SECONDARY CRANE
PRIMARY CRANE
8 4
s t s o P
M t S
Playground
W e l t t o C
y a
2 6
m 0 0 5 3
14
8 o t
6 1 1 1
m 0 0 5
E H DT R A W D GE WS E N I M K D R I H T
PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING AND SITE TRAFFIC ROUTES
4 o1 1t
9 1
3 2
ACCESS
T E E R T S E S I D A R A P
3.6m
s r e t e P t S e h T d n a s l e g n A n a i d r a u G h c r u h C C R
P a t h
Nursery
10 m 0 40 m
Revision History
SCALE 1 : 500
Description Dsgnr Chkd Appd Date
Iss
Hall
AC
DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
REVI PSTV
DARD
06/12/2009
AC AB
DRAFT - THIRD ISSUE DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE
on f i de nt i al
RE
SMS DS
MK CH
15-10-09 24-07-09
RS
Pynfolds
1 8 2
an d
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
WASTE 5 0
Rev:
D A O R A C I A M A J
Christ Church Gate
41 52
THAMES TUNNEL
29
Contract Name:
4 5 2
40 51
Drawing Title:
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT S54SK - INTERMEDIATE (NORTH)

Southwark Park
37
e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_4\dms04380\100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100102.dgn Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size:
PLOTTED ON
02/11/2011
BY
e s u o H m a e r t s l l i M
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100102
r af t
30
Location / Town:
SOUTHWARK - S54SK - KING STAIRS GARDEN
1:500
A1
AC
1 0 0
3.2m
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
2 7
e h T n o i s s Mi
3.1m
King Stairs Gardens

DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
8 3
m 0 0 0 1
3 1
2 2
o t
e t a t s E s y r a
o t
1 2
1 a
CP
1t o4
3.9m
SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
NT HA EP EL E AN L
2.9m
3 4
T S M R A
FO R FUL ET TRE DS
C Y H U
1 5
R C H
e s u y Ho a h t Ca
1 o t
o 1t 4 2
7
KEY: SLURRY PROCESSING AND EXCAVATED MATERIAL SEPERATION PLANT, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA WORKSHOP AND STORES AREA
s t s Po
LO F Y A
3500m
8 4 2 0 5 2
3 0 1 o t 0 6
HAY CAT EET STR
W R E R T S T E E
1000m
2
500m
OFFICES, WELFARE, CANTEEN AND MEDICAL
ed t i Un
1 o t 8
SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE

1200m
2
e us Ho
h t Pa
y b s e Pr
6 3 2 8 3 2
T PRO SPEC
4 3 2
6
Princes
EXCAVATED MATERIAL JETTY NEW MATERIAL CONVEYOR
7 9 o t 3 9
N
Status:
3 0 1
Keyplan:
FOR INFORMATION
N
Stairs
Jetty
y t t e J
NEW MATERIAL JETTY EXCAVATED MATERIAL CONVEYORS
0 1
6 1
East India Court
DRAWING LOCATION
3.2m
1
9
OVERFLOW CULVERT
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN
Shingle
COFFERDAM
8
Kings Stairs
PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE
2 1
o t 3 2
1 1
H P LE E N A T 4
EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
25m I.D. SHAFT
N LA E
National Wharf
5 2
W D
The Angel (PH)

1 0 1
o 8t 1 0 3
2 3
3.9m
10
i o n a l T e r r a c e
4.2m 4.4m
m 0 0 0 1 m 0 0 4 1
El Sub Sta
1 2 t o 2 2
PRIMARY GANTRY CRANE
8 4
m 0 7 4 2
s t s o P
2 6
m 0 0 1 2
6 1 1 1
8 o t
14
CP
3 3
NT HA EP EL E AN L
3 4
FO R FUL ET TRE DS
KEY: SLURRY PROCESSING AND EXCAVATED MATERIAL SEPERATION PLANT, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA WORKSHOP AND STORES AREA
1 5
Playground
30m I.D. SHAFT FOR ALT 2 (SO21T)
e s u y Ho a h t Ca
m 0 0 5
SECONDARY CRANE
W e l t t o C
y a
1 o t
OFFICES, WELFARE, CANTEEN AND MEDICAL
o 1t 4 2
s t s Po
SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE, SEGMENT STORAGE STOCKYARD
9 1
3 2
T ES S I D A R A P
3.6m
S S T E E C C E A R
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 11870m
s r e t e P t S e h T d n a s l e g n A n a i d r a u G h c r u h C C R
King Stairs
10 m 0 40 m
Gardens
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AC AB
DRAFT - THIRD ISSUE DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
REVI PSTV IL DB GT SMS
DARD GT MK
09/12/2010 40130 40095
Nursery
Hall
SITE BOUNDARY AREA = 29448m EGRESS
9 5 o t 7 2
8 1
The Point, 7th Floor,
37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
1 8 2
an d
Location Code:
OS Reference:
Pynfolds
3.2m
El Sub Sta
3 0 1 o t 0 6
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3479
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR

Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:
WASTE 5 0
SOUTHWARK
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
Drawing Title:
NEW PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT S54SK - INTERMEDIATE + CSO CT DRIVE

Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
09/11/2011
BY
LOCATION
D A O R A C I A : e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_4\dms04380\100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100202.dgn M A J
100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100202

6 2 o t 1
r af t
1:500
A1
AC
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
3.0m
P a t h
AA
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
2 7
1t o4
6 7 o t 6 6
1 3 o t 8 3
HAY CAT EET STR
ed t i Un
E H DT R A W D GE WS E N I M K D R I H T
PARKING, VEHICLE MARSHALLING AND SITE TRAFFIC ROUTES
e us Ho
4 o1 1t
S S E C C A
m i gr l Pi
e h T n o i s s Mi
3.1m
DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
H e s ou
h t Pa
y b s e Pr
R EG
ESS
1 6
1 4
6
Status:
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
THIS DRAWING
RIVER THAMES
A
KINGS STAIRS GARDEN
NT HA EP EL E AN L
R FO FUL ET TRE DS
KEY: PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING AND SITE TRAFFIC ROUTES
SECONDARY CRANE
3500m
SLURRY PROCESSING AND EXCAVATED MATERIAL SEPERATION PLANT, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA
1200m
SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE, SEGMENT STORAGE STOCKYARD
450m
WORKSHOP AND STORES AREA
500m
OFFICES, WELFARE , CANTEEN AND MEDICAL
1500m 1000m DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
10 m
40 m
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
2000m 1200m
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
REVI PSTV
DARD
24/11/2010
500m ACCESS
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 8731m EGRESS
an d
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3479
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR

WASTE 5 0
SOUTHWARK
) 0 0 2 A D( A O AR C I A M A J
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
Drawing Title:
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT S54SK - INTERMEDIATE (SOUTH)

Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
09/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-S54SK-135006
25m ID SHAFT
PRIMARY CRANE
r af t
1:500
A1
AA
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
Appendix 8 Operational phase layout
Appendix 8 Page 1
6
Status:
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
a 3 0 1
7 9 o t 3 9
3 0 1
B F
1 o t
DRAWING LOCATION
Princes Stairs
20
Jetty
1 to 19
y t t e J
6 1
0 1
3.2m
East India Court
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS
ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER
1 to 13
STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
Shingle
Kings Stairs
Ceylon Wharf
Ivory Wharf
2 1
o t 3 2
1 1
H P LE E N A T N LA
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO THE TUNNEL DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
5 2
W D
The Angel (PH)

1 0 1
3.9m
PERMANENT HARDSTANDING FOR FUTURE CRANE ACCESS
El Sub Sta
BURIED 25m I.D SHAFT
8 4
PERMANENT ACCESS
VENTILATION BUILDING 15m x 5m x 5m HIGH
s t s o P
1 5
M t S
e t a t s E s y r a
Playground
VENTILATION COLUMN
W e l t t o C
y a
2 6
8 o t
14
6 1 1 1
4 o1 1t
9 1
3 2
3.6m
AB
DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE
on f i de nt i al
T E E R T S E S I D A R A P
RS
DS
CH
24-07-09
3.0m
Nursery
P a t h
Hall
9 5 o t 7 2
an d
Location Code:
OS Reference:
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR

Location / Town:
WASTE 5 0
Rev:
Site Name:
1 8 2
Project Name:
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
3.2m
El Sub Sta
3 0 1 o t 0 6
Drawing Title:
OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT - S54SK - MAIN + INTERMEDIATE/CSO CT DRIVE + INTER. (NORTH)

Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size:
PLOTTED ON
02/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100003
r af t
Pynfolds
SOUTHWARK - S54SK - KING STAIRS GARDEN
1:500
A1
AC
1 0 0
1 5 0
2 7
e h T n o i s s Mi
3.1m
10 m
40 m
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
King Stairs Gardens
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AC
DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
REVI PSTV
DARD
17/07/2009
2 0 0 mm
o t
1 2
1 a
4.2m
20m x 10m TOP STRUCTURE @ 104.5m (AOD + 100m)
PH
3 9t o4 7
o 8t 1 0 3
2 3
CP
1t o4
3 3
NT HA EP EL E AN L
3 4
FO R FUL ET TRE DS
e s u y Ho a h t Ca
1 o t
o 1t 4 2
s t s Po
LO F Y A
HAY CAT EET STR
W R E R T S T E E
ed t i Un
1 o t 8
e us Ho
h t Pa
y b s e Pr
6
Status:
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
THIS DRAWING
RIVER THAMES
A
KINGS STAIRS GARDEN
NT HA EP EL E AN L
20m x 10m TOP STRUCTURE @ 104.5m (AOD + 100m)
R FO FUL ET TRE DS
BURIED 25m ID SHAFT DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE OPERATIONAL PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
10 m
40 m
SCALE 1 : 500 VENTILATION BUILDING 15 x 5 x 5m HIGH

Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
VENTILATION TOWER
AA
FIRST ISSUE
REVI PSTV
DARD
24/11/2010
PERMANENT HARDSTANDING FOR FUTURE CRANE ACCESS

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road,
PERMANENT ACCESS
Paddington, London W2 1AF

an d
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3479
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR

WASTE 5 0
SOUTHWARK
) 0 0 2 A D( A O AR C I A M A J
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
Drawing Title:
OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT S54SK - INTERMEDIATE (SOUTH)

Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
02/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-S54SK-135007
r af t
1:500
A1
AA
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
6
VENTILATION BUILDING (SHAFTS)

107m (AOD +100) REMOVABLE COVER ABOVE FLAP VALVES (LOCKABLE)
Status:
WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N
10
3m
9m
107m (AOD + 100m)
20
RI
ES
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36.

2m
ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
VARIBLE DEPENDING ON
NOTE: 1. STRUCTURE TO BE PROTECTED BY REMOVABLE HANDRAILS IN THE TEMPORARY CASE.

GROUND LEVEL
2. POSITION OF COVERS ARE VARIABLE WITHIN 10m FROM THE EDGE OF THE STRUCTURE, AND THE LOCATION IS BASED ON SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT 3. CLADDING OF VENTILLATION BUILDING TO SUIT LOCATION AND AESTHETICS. 4. ALL TOP STRUCTURES TO HAVE:ACCESS STAIRS/LADDER TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT HAND RAILING 5. ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED.
7m (AOD +100m) REMOVABLE COVER ABOVE SHAFT (LOCKABLE)
5000
REMOVABLE COVERS ARE SPLIT UP INTO SECTIONS AND SUPPORTED BY BEAMS, WHICH ARE ALSO REMOVABLE
50
00
15000
SCALE 1:100
DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF TOP STRUCTURE ABOVE MAIN AND INTERMEDIATE SHAFTS VENTILATION TOWER (SHAFTS)
- - 10000
- - - - - - AB DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE IL RS
Dsgnr
GT DS
Chkd
GT CH
Appd
27-11-09 - 22-05-09
Date
AA DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
---
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
Location / Town: Site Name:
WASTE LONDON N/A

50
3m DIA
Project Name:
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

Drawing Title:
SCALE 1:50
GENERIC ELEVATION AND TOP STRUCTURE FOR OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT - SHAFT SITES
Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
04\12\09
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
Thames Tideway Tunnel
x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\Routewide\100-DH-GEN-00000-000002.dgn
100-DH-GEN-00000-000002
NTS
A1
AB
100
150
200mm
Appendix 9 Environmental appraisal tables

Transport
Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments Access to road network Site accesses directly onto the carriageway of Paradise Street. The site incorporates part of the Kings Stairs Gardens park (including a playground), part of Paradise Street and the entirety of Fulford Street, both of which currently provide on-street Mitigation required and conclusions Conclusion: Road access to site on Paradise Street suitable for HGVs with the removal of some on-street parking bays near the site access. Thames Path and cycle route will likely require diversion around the site. Access to church/ remainder of Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Site is located within southern half of Kings Stairs Gardens. Construction site features a separate access and egress point. The access is located on the northern arm (B205 Brunel Road) exit of the A101/ A200 roundabout and is left-in only. Site egress is left-out only Mitigation required and conclusions Conclusion: Both construction and permanent accesses suitable with no visible constraints. Site access and egress will require construction. Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left, except: Construction site egress will be onto Jamaica Road (A200) to the south of the site via an access road through the park. This will enable a one-way system through the site for construction Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left, except: Construction site egress will be onto Jamaica Road (A200) to enable a one-way system through the site for construction vehicles. The construction egress will require construction and will
Site considerations
Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Appendix 9 Page 1
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Transport

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments parking. Access to the church will need to be maintained in addition to a section of Kings Stairs Gardens in the southeast section of the site. The Thames Path and cycle route may require diverting around the site along Jamaica Road. Several shared cycle/ footways through the park also require Mitigation required and conclusions park needs to be maintained. Alternative accesses via Kings Stairs Close and Jamaica Road are unsuitable. Access route to the TLRN (A200) is suitable via Paradise Street and Cathay Street. No visible restrictions other than passing through a residential area. Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments and located on Jamaica Road west of the A101/ A200 roundabout. Several shared cycle/ footways through the park will require diversion. Permanent site access/ egress from Jamaica Road. Access to the A200 Jamaica Road (TLRN strategic highway network) is direct with no Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments vehicles. The pedestrian egress will require construction and will require a left-out only set-up. A pedestrian footbridge will be constructed to maintain pedestrian access to the church via Kings Stairs Gardens. Mitigation required and conclusions require a left-out only set-up. A pedestrian footbridge will be constructed to maintain pedestrian access to the church.
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 2

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments diversion. Alternative access from Kings Stairs Close unsuitable due to traffic calming (raised tables), on-street parking, narrow carriageway width and residential surroundings. Access onto Jamaica Road is constrained due to a continuous bus lane on the nearside carriageway. Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments visible constraints. Distance to TLRN (A200) 0m. A preliminary transport access plan is attached as Appendix 5. Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 3

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments Paradise Street is subject to a 30mph speed limit and is street lit. It has a carriageway width of 5.2m, reduced to an effective width of 3.1m due to on-street parking. Several on-street parking bays on Paradise Street within the vicinity of the access will require removal to ensure that visibility is sufficient and Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 4

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments the access is not obstructed for construction vehicles. Access to the A200 Jamaica Road (TLRN strategic highway network) via Paradise Street and south along Cathay Street. Access route has no visible restrictions other than passing through a residential area. Distance to Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 5

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments TLRN (A200) approximately 100m. A preliminary transport access plan is attached as Appendix 5. Access to river Intermediate shaft site river access not essential as road will be used to transport excavated material to main site. River access not required. Excavated material will be transported away by road to main site. As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Main shaft site site adjacent to the river for access via overhead material conveyors. The Thames Path and a cycle route would require diverting. City Cruises mooring point may need to be relocated. River access possible via overhead material conveyors. The Thames Path and a cycle route require diversion. The City Cruises mooring point may need to be relocated. As for main site, see left. As for main site, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 6

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments Access to rail Access to old London Bridge station site for rail access (approximately 1km southeast of London Bridge Station) from the TLRN (A200) onto St James Road, then Dockley Road. The route passes through a 20mph zone, with traffic calming along St James Road (speed cushions, raised zebra Mitigation required and conclusions Route to potential rail link at old station site possible requiring the removal of the traffic calming (raised crossing and raised junction) on St James Road and Dockley Road. The site is likely to have limited use during the night and a means of transporting material from the construction Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left
Site considerations
Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left
Appendix 9 Page 7

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments crossing) and a raised junction treatment on to Dockley Road. Raised crossing and junction treatment require removal. Old station site is likely to have very limited night use, being on the main line with no space for sidings on the viaduct. Alternative rail access at London Bridge Station, Mitigation required and conclusions vehicles to the rail site would need to be provided. Alternative rail access at London Bridge Station is possible. The route from the site passes under and over several bridges with no visible restrictions, as well as through a high street area and the congestion zone. London Bridge Station has the Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 8

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments accessible via the TLRN (A200) and Borough High Street, which passes under a rail bridge with no visible restrictions. The route also passes through a high street area and the congestion zone. London Bridge Station has the potential to be used during the night and off peak, although significant use constraints Mitigation required and conclusions potential to be used during the night and off peak, although significant use constraints and issues with loading would exist. Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 9

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments and issues with loading would exist. Distance 1.1km to rail access point at old station site and 2.7km to rail access at London Bridge Station from site. Parking Some parking could potentially be provided on site for the workforce. On-street parking nearby along Paradise Street, Cathay Street and other Parking could potentially be provided on site for workforce. On-street parking on surrounding roads limited to a maximum stay of 4hrs so unsuitable for workforce. Some parking could potentially be provided on site for the workforce. On-street parking nearby along Paradise Street, Cathay Street and other Parking could potentially be provided on site for workforce. On-street parking on surrounding roads limited to a maximum stay of 4hrs so unsuitable for workforce. As for intermediate (Option 1), see left As for intermediate (Option 1), see left As for intermediate (Option 1), see left As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 10

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments surrounding roads is unsuitable as restricted to a maximum stay of 4hrs (Mon-Fri 08:00-18:30). Approximately 25-35 on-street parking bays (around 10-15 public and 15-20 permit holder) are incorporated within the site boundary and will therefore be lost. A new car park to compensate for the lost permit holder Mitigation required and conclusions A new car park could be provided on site to compensate for the removal of approximately 15-20 permit holder bays which requires further investigation. Several on-street parking bays along Paradise Street also require removal. Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments surrounding roads is unsuitable as restricted to a maximum stay of 4hrs (Mon-Fri 08:00-18:30). Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 11

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments bays could be provided on site which requires further investigation. The 10-15 public parking spaces are assumed to be for the park. Several parking bays along Paradise Street also require removal for access into the site. Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 12

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments Public transport accessibility PTAL 3-4 (medium), as identified within Table 2.3. Mitigation required and conclusions Reasonable possibility for workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. The Thames Path and cycle route will require diversion around the site. Paths within the park will also need rerouting. Several on-street parking bays need to be removed and access to the church must be Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Site considerations
Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Traffic management
Diversion of Thames Path and cycle route paths around the site. Several on-street parking bays on Paradise Street to be removed. Removal of raised crossing and junction treatment required for
Site access and egress will require construction. Pedestrian and cycle routes within the park will require diversion. Removal of raised crossing and junction treatment required for rail access at the old London
Site access and egress require construction with minor amendments to access suggested. Pedestrian and cycle routes through the park will require diversion. Rail access at the old London Bridge site
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left, in addition to: Construction of temporary construction egress. Construction of pedestrian footbridge over Jamaica Road (A200).
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left, in addition to: Construction of temporary construction egress. Construction of pedestrian footbridge over Jamaica Road (A200).
Appendix 9 Page 13

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Comments rail access at the old London Bridge site. Possible construction of a new car park on site to compensate for loss of permit holder parking. Access to church/park must be maintained. A preliminary transport management plan is attached as Appendix 5. Summary: Mitigation required and conclusions maintained. Rail access at the old London Bridge site requires the removal of a raised crossing and junction treatment. A new car park could be provided for permit holders to replace lost bays. Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Bridge site. It may be appropriate to widen the exit of the northern arm of the A200 roundabout to provide an off-slip for the site access. Mitigation required and conclusions requires the removal of a raised crossing and junction treatment. Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
The site is suitable in transport terms incorporating some of Kings Stairs Gardens. Site
The site is suitable in transport terms. The site access and egress will require
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left, except: River access possible via
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left and in addition: Temporary construction
Appendix 9 Page 14

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Mitigation required and conclusions accesses onto the end of Paradise Street and some parking bays close to the access may require removal for construction vehicles. Approximately 30-35 on-street parking bays would be displaced by the site. A new car park could be provided on site to compensate for the loss which requires further investigation. Pedestrian access to a church and the remainder of the park would need to be maintained. The Thames Path and cycle route require diversion in addition to some footways within the park. Access route to the TLRN (A200) is suitable with no major constraints. Potential rail access at old London Bridge rail site requires the removal of traffic calming (raised table and junction) on St James Road and a means of transporting Comments Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Mitigation required and conclusions construction. However, there is direct access to the TLRN (A200) with no major constraints. Points on potential rail access, river access, the potential for the workforce to utilise public transport and onsite and on-street parking are the same as for the intermediate shaft site (Option 1). Comments Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions overhead material conveyors. The City Cruises mooring point may need to be relocated. Comments Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Mitigation required and conclusions egress with a left-out only set-up will require construction onto Jamaica Road (A200), enabling a one-way system through the site for construction vehicles. A pedestrian footbridge will be constructed over Jamaica Road (A200) to maintain access to the church via Kings Stairs Gardens. Comments
Site considerations
Appendix 9 Page 15

Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 1 northern site layout) Mitigation required and conclusions materials to the railway. Potential rail access at East London Line Depot passes over one bridge with no visible constraints and under two rail bridges with height restrictions. River access not essential for intermediate shaft site as excavated material to be transported by road to main site. Reasonable potential exists for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking to be provided on site for workforce. On-street parking on surrounding roads unsuitable as restricted to a maximum stay of 4hrs. Comments Main tunnel reception/ intermediate (Option 2 southern site layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel site Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 16
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Archaeology Site considerations Designations, including archaeological priority areas Summary of historical uses Intermediate (Option 1 north), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments The site is within the Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (APA) The proposed construction area of the site is located close to the Thames foreshore, on the bank previously occupied by terraced housing and a church/school in the south area during the 19th and 20th centuries. The terraces were demolished in the 1970s. A church and graveyard were present to the south of and outside the site. A moated medieval manor house (Rotherhithe Palace) associated with Edward III (NMR 918320) was located approx 80 100m to the west of and outside the shaft site. Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable. Intermediate (Option 2 south) Comments Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left.
A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
The proposed construction Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left. area of the site is set slightly back from the current River Thames. The north of the site was previously occupied by terraced housing. The south of the site considered for this intermediate (Option 2) contained a school and a church (St Peters, built c 1903). The school was located where the proposed shaft site of the intermediate (Option 2) is proposed with the church, which still stands immediately to the west. The terraces to the north were demolished in the
Appendix 9 Page 17
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Archaeology Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 north), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 south) Comments 1970s. A School chapel, church and graveyard were also present to the south of and outside the site. A moated medieval manor house (Rotherhithe Palace) associated with Edward III (NMR 918320) was located approx 80 100m to the west of and outside the shaft site. Potential receptors of very high or high value with the potential to be directly affected No archaeological receptors are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within the site. A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left. Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left. Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 18
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Archaeology Site considerations Potential receptors of medium value with the potential to be directly affected Intermediate (Option 1 north), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments No archaeological receptors are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within the site. An archaeological excavation to the west of the site revealed evidence of medieval activity which may continue into the area of the site. Construction impact of potential waterlogged deposits containing archaeological remains may cause dewatering. This potential impact should be considered, given the close proximity of the site to the River Thames. Mitigation required and conclusions A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Intermediate (Option 2 south) Comments Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left.
Other receptors with the potential to be directly affected
A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left.
Appendix 9 Page 19
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Archaeology Site considerations Extent of existing disturbance (if known) Intermediate (Option 1 north), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Terracing in the area of the proposed shaft may have disturbed archaeological remains of medieval or earlier date. Borehole data in the area suggests made ground of up to 7m which could be in part archaeological material. Detailed design proposals and an outline method statement will be required to enable initial assessment of development impacts, and to inform mitigation proposals. With the currently available information, it is not possible to highlight specific potential issues. Mitigation required and conclusions A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Intermediate (Option 2 south) Comments The construction of the school in the 19th century in the area of the proposed shaft may have disturbed archaeological remains of medieval or earlier date. Borehole data in the area suggests made ground of up to 7m which could be in part archaeological material. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as intermediate (Option 1) see left.
Potential issues
Same as intermediate Mitigation methods could include: (Option 1) see left. desk-based assessment production of deposits model archaeological monitoring of geotechnical investigations archaeological evaluation archaeological watching
Appendix 9 Page 20
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Archaeology Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 north), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Mitigation required and conclusions brief qrchaeological excavation. Intermediate (Option 2 south) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary: The site is suitable as an intermediate (both options), intermediate with connection tunnel drive or main tunnel drive site, although due to a lack of previous investigations in the area, the nature and extent of archaeological receptors cannot be confidently predicted. It is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within the site. Peat deposits containing archaeological material have been commonly recorded throughout London in a similar proximity to the Thames. Given the location of the site and wider evidence for historical occupation along the river, it is a reasonable assumption to suggest waterlogged remains of archaeological value may be present.
Appendix 9 Page 21
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Designations including conservation areas, including trees Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Listed buildings Sir William Gaitskell House, railings handrail and lampholder, Paradise Street, Grade II: 30m Corbetts Wharf, Bermondsey Wall East, Grade II: 145m Archway to the Rotherhithe Tunnel Approach, Rotherhithe Tunnel Approach, Grade II: 90m St Olavs Kirke, Albion Street, Grade II: 120m The Finnish Church (including attached tower), Albion Street, Grade II: 215m Former engine house in recreation ground, St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 135m Watch house in recreation ground (adjoining 70 St Marychurch Street), St Marychurch Street, Grade II: Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left
In the case of listed buildings, As for intermediate, conservation areas, registered see left historic parks and gardens and protected views, a high-quality scheme design and adequate screening for the development may be required, as discussed below. A detailed desk-based assessment in conjunction with archaeology work will be required to further inform the likely impact of the development and to determine more detailed mitigation proposals.
Appendix 9 Page 22
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments 165m 70 St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 170m Grices Granary Film Studios, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 245m Grices Wharf, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 250m Church stairs, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 240m Church of St Mary, Rotherhithe, St Marychurch Street, Grade II*: 195m Monument to Prince Lee Boo (approx 10m west of the west tower of the church of St Mary), St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 170m Hope Sufferance Wharf, St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 155m East India Wharf, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 106m Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 23
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments 105 Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 135m 103 Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 115m 101 Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 105m 99 Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 95m Locally listed buildings The London Borough of Southwark of does not maintain a local list. The London Borough of Tower Hamlets does maintain a local list but there are no locally listed buildings within the borough and within 250m of S54SK. Conservation areas Wapping Pierhead Conservation Area: 125m St Marys Rotherhithe Conservation Area: 50m Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 24
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Registered historic parks and gardens Southwark Park, Grade II: 30m Locally listed parks and gardens There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of S54SK. Protected views S54SK is located 0m away from the Greenwich Park Protected View (as designated in the London Views Management Framework). Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be directly affected There is the potential for one protected view (the Greenwich Park view, as designated by the London View Management Framework) to be directly affected by S54SK as the southwest corner of the site is cut by the protected viewing Because the Greenwich Park As for intermediate, Protected View cuts the see left southwest corner of S54SK, the development of the site has the potential to cause a direct impact on the protected view. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality and sensitive design and/or screening may As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 25
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments corridor. Mitigation required and conclusions therefore be required to reduce any adverse impacts. In particular, it may be necessary to ensure that any temporary and permanent structures related to construction and operation of S54SK are located as far away from the southwest corner of the site as is possible and practicable, in order that the distance between such elements and the protected view is increased and the potential visual intrusiveness of the site minimised. Not applicable. Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be directly affected
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Appendix 9 Page 26
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments There is the potential for 19 listed buildings (one Grade II* and 18 Grade II listed buildings), two conservation areas and one registered historic park and garden to be indirectly affected by the development. Mitigation required and conclusions Of the 19 listed buildings within 250m of S54SK, nine do not fall within the visual envelope of the site (the Finnish Church, Albion Street; the former engine house, St Marychurch Street; the Watch House, St Marychurch Street; 70 St Marychurch Street; Grices Granary Film Studios; Church Stairs; Grices Wharf; the Church of St Marys, Rotherhithe; and the monument to Prince Lee Boo). Consequently, no impact is expected arising from construction or operation of S54SK upon these seven listed structures and therefore no mitigation will be required. Of the remaining ten listed buildings (all Grade II listed), all fall within the visual envelope of the site. All of these structures therefore Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left
Appendix 9 Page 27
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions have the potential to be indirectly affected by the construction and operation of S54SK. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening is therefore likely to be required. Both of the conservation areas within 250m of the site (the Wapping Pierhead Conservation Area and the St Marys Rotherhithe Conservation Area) lie within the visual envelope of the site. There is consequently the potential for S54SK intermediate to impact on the setting of or views to and from these designated areas. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening may therefore be required. Similarly, the Southwark Park registered historic park and Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 28
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions garden lies within the visual envelope of S54SK, and could therefore experience an impact on its setting as a result of the development. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening may therefore be required. Not applicable. Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Sensitive landscape character areas likely to be affected, including trees and TPOs
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Site partially in the Thames Policy Area, closely matches definition of Metropolitan Open Land, site within wider designation of metropolitan park deficiency area and adjacent to site of nature conservation importance. Sensitive site in Kings Stairs
Retention of trees where possible and protection in accordance with BS 5837. Introduction of landscape scheme to include appropriate surface treatments and planting to replace lost vegetation, and relate to the character of the park and the
As for intermediate, As for intermediate, see left, except that see left the jetties and conveyors protruding into the river would result in a further adverse impact on the character of the river.
Appendix 9 Page 29
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Gardens, within a large area of parkland with established vegetation and trees, on the south bank of the River Thames. Site is also situated adjacent to the Grade II registered Southwark Park. There is the potential for the setting of the park to be impacted by the proposals. River Thames to the north with residential properties along the north bank, site surrounded by residential properties, Kings Stairs Gardens surrounded by Jamaica Road and Brunel Road to the south, Cathay Street and Fulford Street to the west, residential properties to the east. Construction site is constrained by mature trees and vegetation. Mitigation required and conclusions adjacent river frontage. Removal of mature vegetation and the presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings on site is likely to severely impact character of the park and river frontage. This site is therefore less suitable. Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 30
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments The removal of mature vegetation in the park would increase openness of site. The presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings would potentially result in temporary, adverse direct impacts on the character of the park and the river frontage, and temporary adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas. Permanent elements would potentially result in permanent adverse direct impacts on the character of the park, the river and its frontage. Potential views likely to be affected Site partially falls within the Greenwich Park Protected View. Open views from the river, from within the park and overlooking residences around the park, and on the During construction, the use of hoardings and appropriate lighting would minimise visual impact. The excavated material could be used as a bund for screening, especially along As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 31
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments north bank of the river. The site also lies within views from Southwark Park and four listed buildings. These have the potential to be impacted on by both construction and permanent elements. Partially interrupted views from other residences along the north bank of the river. During construction, view of cranes from the surrounding properties and Tower Bridge. Permanent elements visible on site from residences along Cathay House, Kings Stairs Close, Elephant Lane and St Peters Church. Mitigation required and conclusions the south, east, and west. Design of top structure, vent column and electrical kiosk to be given careful consideration. Planting to screen permanent plant. Integrated landscape scheme to aid visual impact and minimise visual impact. Removal of mature vegetation would be visually significant, therefore adequate new planting would be important to protect visual amenity. This site is less suitable since the ventilation column could interfere with the strategic view and the permanent plant could adversely impact on views from surrounding properties. Any permanent structures would need to be of a high-quality design and Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Particular considerations on sites where
Any permanent structures at the site have the potential to cause a direct impact on one
As for the intermediate, see left; Permanent structures
As for the intermediate, see left In order to mitigate
Appendix 9 Page 32
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations new permanent structures are required Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments protected view and an indirect impact on two conservation areas, ten Grade II listed buildings and one registered historic park and garden. The design and location of any permanent structures within the site will need to be given careful consideration, and some screening during construction and operation may be required. Mitigation required and conclusions sensitively located and/or screened in order that any physical and visual impacts on the Greenwich Park Protected View, two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden and ten Grade II listed buildings are minimised, in accordance with planning policy and English Heritage guidance. In respect of the protected view which passes through the southwest corner of S54SK, mitigation through design may need to include consideration of the location of any temporary and permanent structures or features associated with construction and operation of the site, as far away from the protected view as is possible and practicable within the site boundary. This would Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments at the site also have the potential to impact on the character of the park within which the site is located, the river and its frontage, particularly through the removal of mature vegetation. Mitigation required and conclusions impacts on the local townscape character and the character of the river and its frontage, the scheme design will require careful consideration, and landscaping and planting will be required.
Appendix 9 Page 33
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions increase the distance between such features and the protected view, and would help to minimise the visual intrusiveness of the development. Vegetation should be replanted after construction to soften views from the heritage assets. The scheme design would need to be of a sufficiently high quality and may need to incorporate some screening in order to mitigate any potential direct and indirect impacts of the development on one protected view, two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden and ten Grade II listed buildings. Particular attention may need to be paid to the location of constructional and operational features within the Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Potential issues
Construction and operation of the development could result in a direct impact on one protected view, and an indirect impact on two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden and ten Grade II buildings. The impact of the scheme on the townscape character, including existing trees at the site, will also need to be carefully considered. However, there is potential to mitigate against any adverse
As for intermediate, see left
As for intermediate, see left
Appendix 9 Page 34
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments impacts through a high-quality scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. Mitigation required and conclusions site in order to mitigate against potential impacts on the protected view which passes through the southwest corner of S54SK. Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary:
In terms of built heritage, the site is likely to be suitable as an intermediate site (both options), as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The site may potentially give rise to adverse indirect impacts on two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden and ten listed buildings. It is likely that these impacts could be mitigated through a carefully considered scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. In terms of townscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as an intermediate site. The site has the potential to give rise to direct adverse impacts on a protected view, the character of the park, a public open space, the river frontage and local views (especially during construction, which would involve the removal of mature vegetation). Permanent elements would potentially result in adverse direct impacts on the character of the park. Adverse impacts could be partially minimised through a carefully considered scheme design (including sensitive positioning of temporary and permanent structures away from the riverfront, and the retention of existing trees where possible) and/or screening and
In terms of built heritage, the site is likely to be suitable as a main tunnel drive site or main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site, as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The details are as for the intermediate, see left. In terms of townscape and landscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as a main tunnel drive site or main tunnel reception/ intermediate with connection tunnel drive site. The details are as for the intermediate, see left. The main tunnel drive site and main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site have the potential to result in a higher magnitude of impact on landscape character and receptors than the intermediate option due to the increased size of the site,
Appendix 9 Page 35
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Mitigation required and conclusions landscaping. Such mitigation could allow the site to be progressed further, but more detailed assessment of likely impacts and appropriate mitigation measures will be required, particularly with regards to the Greenwich Park Protected View, which passes through the southwest corner of the site. Comments Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Mitigation required and conclusions especially during construction. Comments
Appendix 9 Page 36
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Hydrogeological conditions (groundwater and surface water) From BGS Geological Model, giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river. Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Geology (thickness) Superficial geology and made ground (7m) Lambeth Group (18m) Thanet Sand (25m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft) Hydrogeology Piezometric level in Chalk aquifer: ~ -21mAOD (~25mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring. Groundwater monitoring location EA hydrometry sites: TQ37-268 1.52km southeast of the site (water levels to Nov 2007) TQ37-276 353m northeast of the site (water levels to March Mitigation required and conclusions The shaft will be constructed to an invert level of approximately 52.14mbgl, therefore the shaft will be founded in the Chalk. Piezometric head in Chalk will be approximately 27.14m above the base of the construction. Therefore, dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design. Note: Piezometric head is a specific measurement of water pressure above a datum. Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Geology (thickness) Superficial geology and made ground (7m) Lambeth Group (18m) Thanet Sand (25m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft) Hydrogeology Piezometric level in Chalk aquifer: ~ -21mAOD (~25mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring. Groundwater monitoring location EA hydrometry sites: TQ37-268 1.4km southeast of the site (water levels to Nov 2007) TQ37-276 370m northeast of the site (water levels to March Mitigation required and conclusions The shaft will be constructed to an invert level of approximately 61mbgl, therefore the shaft will be founded in the Chalk. Piezometric head in Chalk will be approximately 36m above the base of the construction. Therefore, dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design. Note: Piezometric head is a specific measurement of water pressure above a datum.
Appendix 9 Page 37
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments 2009) TQ37-7E 1.08km southwest of the site (water levels to March 2009) SPZs and groundwater users SPZ Not located in a source protection zone defined by EA. EA licensed groundwater abstractions and details 11 licensed abstraction borehole within 2km radius Licence numbers: 1. 28/39/39/0002 (1 borehole) 2. 28/39/39/0066 (1 borehole) 3. 28/39/42/0048 (3 boreholes) 4. 28/39/42/0062 (4 boreholes) 5. 28/39/42/0073 (2 boreholes) A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the theoretical total catchment zone of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100 mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follows: 1. 150m 2. 85m 3. 258m 4. 581m 5. 203m Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments 2009) TQ37-7E 1.05km southwest of the site (water levels to March 2009) SPZ Not located in a source protection zone defined by EA. EA licensed groundwater abstractions and details 10 licensed abstraction borehole within 2km radius Licence numbers: 1. 28/39/39/0002 (1 borehole) 2. 28/39/42/0048 (3 boreholes) 3. 28/39/42/0062 (4 boreholes) 4. 28/39/42/0073 (2 boreholes) A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the theoretical total catchment zone of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100 mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follows: 1. 150m 2. 258m 3. 581m 4. 203m Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 38
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Locations: 1. 1.67km northwest of the site 2. 2km northwest of the site 3. 794m southeast of the site 4. 1.5km northwest of the site 5. 1.17km southeast of the site. Operator: 1. Mars Pension Trustees Limited 2. DB6 Limited 3. London Borough of Southwark 4. London Bridge Development Limited 5. Harmsworth Quays Printing Limited Abstracted aquifer unit: 1. Chalk 2. Chalk 3. Chalk Mitigation required and conclusions The shaft is not located within any of these catchment areas. Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Locations: 1. 1.6km northwest of the site 2. 600 m southeast of the site 3. 1.6km northwest of the site 4. 1.1km southeast of the site. Operator: 1. Mars Pension Trustees Limited 2. London Boroughof Southwark 3. London Bridge Development Limited 4. Harmsworth Quays Printing Limited Abstracted aquifer unit: 1. Chalk 2. Chalk 3. Chalk 4. Chalk Mitigation required and conclusions The shaft is not located within any of these catchment areas.
Appendix 9 Page 39
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments 4. Chalk 5. Chalk Abstraction purposes: 1. Industrial, commercial and public services (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 2. Industrial, commercial and public services (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 3. Amenity (industrial/commercial/energy/ public services make-up or top-up water) 4. Industrial, commercial and public services (public administration non-evaporative cooling) 5. Industrial, commercial and public services (paper and printing process water and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Abstraction purposes: 1. Industrial, commercial and public services (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 2. Amenity (industrial/commercial/energy/ public services make-up or top-up water) 3. Industrial, commercial and public services (public administration non-evaporative cooling) 4. Industrial, commercial and public services (paper and printing process water and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) Abstraction quantity (annual): 1. 28,185m3 2. 83,804m3 3. 424,600m3 4. 52,000m3 Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 40
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Abstraction quantity (annual): 1. 28,185m3 2. 9,092m3 3. 83,804m3 4. 424,600m3 5. 52,000m3 Unlicensed groundwater abstractions and details No abstraction borehole within 1km radius. Borehole locations and depths Potential impacts on surface water features There are 12 historical records Not applicable of water wells within 1km radius. Depth range: 10.06 215.95m The site is located adjacent to the River Thames. The site is behind flood defences so the pollution risk is through drainage to the Thames. Work needs to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1, PPG5 and PPS23. There are nine historical records of water wells within 1km radius. Depth range: 15.85 215.95m Same as for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Not applicable Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Unlicensed groundwater abstractions and details No abstraction borehole within 1km radius. Mitigation required and conclusions
Same as for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Appendix 9 Page 41
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Potential impacts on groundwater (resources and quality) Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments An impact on groundwater at depth is likely since the shaft is to be constructed in Chalk (principal aquifer), which will need to be dewatered. At shallow depth, the shaft is located in alluvium, which is classified as a secondary aquifer. Limited impact on shallow aquifer if water is excluded from the excavation by diaphragm wall or caissons. Mitigation required and conclusions See below (likely types of mitigation measures that will be required) Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Same as for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Likely types of mitigation measures that will be required Potential issues
Mitigation unlikely to be required Not applicable as construction of the shaft will not take place within the theoretical total catchment zone of licensed abstractions. The shaft to be excavated in Chalk below the piezometric head, therefore dewatering will be required during construction. Limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer. Piezometric head in Chalk to be considered as part of geotechnical design. The issue of the appropriate disposal of discharges from
Same as for Intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Same as for Intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Appendix 9 Page 42
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Mitigation required and conclusions dewatering to be considered. Impact on and mitigation for shallow aquifer will depend on construction design. Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary:
The site is suitable for use as an intermediate (Option 1), intermediate with connection tunnel drive or as a main tunnel drive site as although construction would take place within Chalk (principal aquifer), the site does not lie within the source protection zones or total catchment zones of licensed abstractions. No long-term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering would be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 27.1m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design. The superficial deposits are alluvium, which is classified as a secondary aquifer at the shaft site, and limited impact on flow in the shallow aquifer is anticipated due to a diaphragm wall or caissons. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because there is no direct pathway to the River
Same as for intermediate (Option 1), except: The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 36m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design.
Appendix 9 Page 43
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), main, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Thames for pollution, although standard mitigation would, however, be required. Comments Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 44
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Statutory designations Non-statutory designated wildlife sites Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Lavender Pond LNR lies within 2km River Thames and Tidal Tributaries SMI lies adjacent to the development site. Southwark Park BGII site lies adjacent to the site, separated by the A200. The site is a proposed site of importance for nature conservation. Mitigation required and conclusions No likely impacts No jetties are indicated as being required. Any constructions affecting the Thames (such as an overflow culvert) will require restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case, the provision of compensatory habitat may be required. Should the area be formally designated as an SNCI, compensatory habitat provision may be required. Loss of parkland habitat may require limited compensatory provision, but this is likely to be straightforward. No jetties are indicated as being required. Any Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments As for intermediate (both options), see left The proposed jetties will lead to direct impacts to the SMI, including land-take. The site is a proposed site of importance for nature conservation. Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (both options), see left Mitigation for the jetties will be required. In the worst case, the provision of compensatory habitat may be required. Should the area be formally designated as an SNCI, compensatory habitat provision may be required.
BAP priority habitats
Much of the site comprises London BAP priority habitat Parks, squares and amenity grassland. The Thames Tideway is a London BAP habitat.
The proposed jetties will lead to direct impacts to the Thames Tideway BAP habitat.
Mitigation for the jetties will be required. In the worst case, the provision of compensatory habitat may be required.
Appendix 9 Page 45
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions construction affecting the Thames (such as an overflow culvert) will require restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case, the provision of compensatory habitat may be required. If bat roosts were found to be present, mitigation would be required, possibly including offsite provision. Careful placement of lighting to minimise illumination of surrounding habitat will be required. If notable breeding birds are present, mitigation would be required, including sensitive working practices and possibly offsite provision. Mitigation will be possible. No jetties are indicated as Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Protected or otherwise notable species within the study area
Trees within the parkland may have the potential to support roosting bats. Pipistrelles have been recorded in adjacent Southwark Park. Notable breeding birds may be present spotted flycatcher is known to breed in the adjacent Southwark Park. The parkland may have value for locally uncommon invertebrates. No direct impacts on aquatic ecology receptors, although any piling close
As for intermediate (both options), see left
As for intermediate (both options), see left
Appendix 9 Page 46
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Comments to the riverbank could result in impacts on fish in the River Thames. Mitigation required and conclusions being required. Any constructions affecting the Thames (such as an overflow culvert) will require extensive restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case, the provision of compensatory habitat may be required. No other issues. Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Potential issues
No other issues.
The cumulative impact of all jetties proposed within the scheme may increase flow velocity in the river, with effects on juvenile migratory fish.
Consideration needs to be given to the cumulative impacts on hydrodynamics, with reference to known critical flow velocities for fish. Not considered significant at a site specific level.
Summary:
The site is less suitable for use as an intermediate shaft site (both options) as it appears that habitats present could act as an extension of an adjacent BGII site for nature conservation (Southwark Park). The area could therefore support roosting bats, birds of conservation concern and locally notable invertebrates, which in turn may place habitat compensation
This site is less suitable for use as a main tunnel drive site or intermediate with connection tunnel drive site for the reasons given left and due to the requirement for temporary and permanent land-take from the foreshore and river (a site of metropolitan importance). This may require sensitive working practices, and there may also be a need for seasonal restrictions on working and
Appendix 9 Page 47
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout) Mitigation required and conclusions requirements on the project. A survey will be required to determine the presence of such species and to determine risks. Comments Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Mitigation required and conclusions some compensatory provision. There could also be potential cumulative effects with other jetty structures in the river and careful negotiation with the EA is likely to be required. Comments
Appendix 9 Page 48
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Flood risk assessment Site considerations Flood risk zone Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout), main tunnel drive, main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site Comments Flood Zone 3 up to one in 200-year flood extent, but defended to the one in 1,000-year flood level. There is a residual risk of a breach for which mitigation would need to be considered as part of the FRA. Sewage transmission infrastructure is considered to be water compatible according to Table D.2 of PPS25. The superficial geology is such that the site may not be suitable for infiltration SUDS. However, there is space on site for surface attenuation SUDS. No other issues. Mitigation required and conclusions An FRA would be required to assess the residual risk of flooding to the site.
Assessment of conditions for SUDS
Not applicable.
Potential issues
No other issues.
Summary: The site is suitable for use as an intermediate (options 1 and 2), main tunnel drive or main tunnel reception/ intermediate with connection tunnel drive site because although the site is within Flood Zone 3 (greater than one in 200-year risk of flooding), the site is protected to the one in 1,000-year flood level and so flood risk will be assessed as residual. In addition, there is potentially space for attenuation SUDS, although an investigation is required to determine the suitability for infiltration SUDS.
Appendix 9 Page 49
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Air quality Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive site, main tunnel drive site Comments AQMA The air quality objectives for NO 2 exceeded on major roads in vicinity of site. There are residential properties along Jamaica Road (A200) and roads on the route to the A200. There are residential properties at the access point to the site, on Paradise Street. There are residential properties within 20m from the site at Cathay House, Pilgrim House and on Elephant Lane/ Mayflower Street. Mitigation required and conclusions There is a need for more site specific data. Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left
Site considerations
Sensitive receptors
There are relevant air quality sensitive receptors present along the route the construction traffic is likely to take and close to the proposed construction works.
There are residential As for intermediate, see properties along the left access route on Jamaica Road (A200). There are residential properties within 20m from the site at Cathay House, Pilgrim House and on Elephant Lane/ Mayflower Street.
Appendix 9 Page 50
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Air quality Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive site, main tunnel drive site Comments Existing traffic issues The main traffic issue in this area is exhaust emissions from vehicles along the A200 and A101 corridors. See above. Mitigation required and conclusions Additional vehicle emissions have a moderate potential to interfere with local air quality action plan policies. See above. Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Site considerations
Existing sources of significant air pollutants Notable gaps in existing air quality monitoring
See above.
See above.
There is no data at likely access to A200 and the nearest existing data indicates AQLV exceeded at present.
Collect a minimum of six months diffusion tube data at site access to the A200 or other point of access to major road network.
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Appendix 9 Page 51
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Air quality Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive site, main tunnel drive site Comments Potential issues The risk from additional exhaust emissions from construction HGVs is undefined at present. The risk from dust impacts at residential properties is moderate. Mitigation required and conclusions Minimise HGV movements on the local road network during the peak hour. Standard dust control measures will minimise the effect of fugitive dust on nearby sensitive receptors. Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate (Option 1), see left
Site considerations
Summary: The site is less suitable for use as an intermediate site (both options main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site or main tunnel drive site) due to the proximity of residential properties since there is potential for emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. Dust impacts can be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is also potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This can be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
Appendix 9 Page 52
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Noise band level (from Defra noise maps) Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions n/a Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Mitigation required and conclusions n/a
Site considerations
Information from n/a Defra noise maps indicates daytime noise levels of up to 68dB L Aeq and night-time noise levels of up to 60dB L Aeq in the southern area of the proposed site closest to the A200 (Jamaica Road). Noise levels drop significantly with increased distance from the A200. Noise levels from the Defra noise maps provide an indication of prevailing noise levels only, and will not be employed in
Appendix 9 Page 53
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments any detailed assessments for chosen sites. Sensitive receptors There are sensitive n/a receptors located to the west, south and east of the proposed site. To the immediate west are four-storey residential properties in Cathay House. To the east, three-storey residential properties are located on Kings Stairs Close and Elephant Lane. Within the southwest corner As for the intermediate, the four-storey residential properties in Cathay House are located approximately 5m from the temporary working area and 30m from the shaft location. The three-storey residential properties on Kings Stairs Close and Elephant Lane are located approximately 8m from the temporary n/a There are sensitive n/a receptors located to the northwest, west and east of the proposed works area. To the northwest are four-storey residential properties in Cathay House. These are located approximately 65m from the temporary working area and 105m from the shaft location. To the west are six-storey residential Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 54
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments of the site boundary is another (private) church and residential dwelling. The site is located within Kings Stairs Gardens itself, which includes St Peters and the Guardian Angels RC Church. Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments properties at Pynfolds. These are located approximately 95m from the temporary working area and 100m from the shaft location. To the east, three-storey residential properties are located on Elephant Lane. These are located approximately 8m from the temporary working area and 75m from the shaft location. Within the southwest corner of the site Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments working area and 35m from the shaft location.
Appendix 9 Page 55
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments boundary is another (private) church and residential dwelling. The site is located within Kings Stairs Gardens itself, which includes St Peters and the Guardian Angels RC Church. A childrens nursery is located to the southwest of the site. Existing traffic issues Road traffic noise n/a from the A200 (Jamaica Road) to the south is likely to dominate the noise climate in the area. As for intermediate (Option 1), see left n/a As for intermediate (Option 1), see left n/a Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
Appendix 9 Page 56
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Existing sources of significant noise emissions Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions n/a Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments As for intermediate (Option 1), see left Mitigation required and conclusions n/a
Site considerations
Road traffic noise n/a from the A200 (Jamaica Road) to the south is likely to dominate the noise climate in the area. There are no railway lines or significant industrial sources apparent in the surrounding area. Construction: The construction period is estimated at four to five years and working hours will be 24 hours per day, Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse Adherence to the good site practices provided in BS5228. Considered positioning of noisy equipment and construction
Potential issues
Construction: The construction period is estimated at six to seven years and working hours will be 24 hours per day, Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to
Construction: The construction period is estimated at four to five years and working hours will be 24 hours per day, Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse
As for intermediate (Option 1), see left working.
Appendix 9 Page 57
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments noise impacts on the sensitive receptors surrounding the site. HGV movements have the potential to result in adverse noise impacts at properties facing Paradise Road or Cathay Street. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing will provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Careful positioning of the noisiest plant, ie, central areas of the site, will assist in Mitigation required and Conclusions activities to maximise distance between source and receiver positions. Provision of site boundary noise fences. Restriction of some construction activities to daytime working. Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments noise impacts on the sensitive receptors surrounding the site. HGV movements have the potential to result in an adverse impact on residential receptors located close to the site. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing will provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Careful positioning of the noisiest plant, ie, central areas of the site, will assist Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments result in adverse noise impacts on the sensitive receptors surrounding the site. HGV and barge movements have the potential to result in adverse noise impacts at properties facing Paradise Road and Cathay Street, and Kings Stairs Close. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing will provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Careful positioning of the
Appendix 9 Page 58
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments reducing the potential noise impact. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 45 metres. Vibration levels are therefore unlikely to result in annoyance or minor cosmetic damage during shaft sinking. Vibration from tunnelling should Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments in reducing the potential noise impact. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 75 metres. Vibration levels are therefore unlikely to result in annoyance or minor cosmetic damage during shaft sinking. Vibration from Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments noisiest plant, ie, central areas of the site, will assist in reducing the potential noise impact. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 30 metres. Vibration levels are therefore unlikely to result in annoyance or minor cosmetic damage during
Appendix 9 Page 59
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments be considered on a case-by-case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: With appropriate attenuation (if necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation column and associated permanent structures should result in adverse noise impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments tunnelling should be considered on a case-by-case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: As for intermediate (Option 1), see left. Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments shaft sinking. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case-by-case basis at particularly sensitive locations. Operation: As for intermediate (Option 1), see left.
Appendix 9 Page 60
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Noise Intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive Comments Summary: Mitigation required and Conclusions Main tunnel drive Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate (Option 2 southern layout) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Site considerations
Comments
This site is considered less suitable for use as an intermediate (Option 1), intermediate with connection tunnel drive or main tunnel drive site due to the proximity of residential receptors to the west, south and east. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers will be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. 24-hour working has particular potential to adversely impact on the closest receptors, and it may be necessary to restrict some of the noisier activities to daytime only. Access of HGVs to the site is also likely to result in disturbance, as they approach through residential streets. For a main shaft and the intermediate with tunnel drive site, the importing and exporting of material by barge would also result in an adverse impact on residential receptors located near the barge jetties.
This site is considered suitable for use as an intermediate (Option 2). The noise climate is likely to be dominated by road traffic on the A200, located immediately adjacent to the site and temporary working area, and HGVs will enter and egress the site directly onto the A200, resulting in less impact on nearby receptors. The nearest residential receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 75 metres. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers is likely to be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Working 24 hours has particular potential to adversely impact on the closest receptors and should use of this site be pursued, it may be necessary to restrict some of the noisier activities to daytime only.
Appendix 9 Page 61
Land quality Site considerations Site location Current site use Intermediate (both Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout), main tunnel drive, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Grid Reference: 534946, 179676 The site is located within Kings Stairs Gardens, which includes St Peters and the Guardian Angels RC Church. The park appears well used, with evidence of recent investment in playground equipment. The park is a landscaped public park with grassy mounds. No visible evidence.
Topography Field evidence of contamination (ie, visual/ olfactory)
Current surrounding land To the immediate west are four-storey residential properties in Cathay House. use (immediately adjacent To the east, three-storey residential properties are located on Kings Stairs Close and Elephant Lane. to site) Within the southwest corner of the site boundary is another (private) church and residential dwelling. The River Thames lies to the north. Geological and hydrogeological information Geological strata1 Geology (thickness) Superficial geology and made ground (7m) Lambeth Group (18m) Thanet Sand (25m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft) Unproductive aquifer: London Clay Secondary aquifer: River terrace deposits, Lambeth Group, Thanet Sand Principal aquifer: Chalk
Underlying aquifer classes
Appendix 9 Page 62
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Land quality Site considerations Groundwater vulnerability/Soil classification (High/Intermediate/Low/ Not applicable)2 Source protection zone details Surface water receptor Historical potentially contaminating activities Intermediate (both Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout), main tunnel drive, intermediate with connection tunnel drive River terrace deposits minor aquifer High leaching potential of soils (U) Note: Soil information for urban areas is based on fewer observations than elsewhere in the country. Therefore, a worst case vulnerability (H) is assumed until proven otherwise. Not located in a source protection zone defined by EA River Thames (adjacent to site, north) On site Residential housing occupying most of site, timber yard (southeast), granary (northeast), 18621895 Residential housing occupies all of site, 1896-1898 Residential housing occupies most of site. Also present are two churches, a school in the southeast and park buildings in the north, 1909-1920 Wharf operations (transport support and cargo handling), (north extent of site), 1920-1995 Historic building plans list underground fuel tanks (4 no, east), 1942-1960 Historic building plans list asbestos (north), 1942-1966 Historic building plans list gas use (east), 1942-1945 Engineering works (located at the south of the site where the shaft is proposed) and a nursery (northwest) also present, 1950-1968 Areas cleared due to enemy action (three areas, northeast and east), 1957-1966 Historic plans list above-ground fuel tank (northeast), 1966
Relevant information within a 250m radius of the site
Appendix 9 Page 63
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Land quality Site considerations Intermediate (both Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout), main tunnel drive, intermediate with connection tunnel drive Residential housing only occupies the southern site border and the site of the nursery, 1967-1978 Electricity substations (2 no, northwest), 1968-1969 Tanks contents unknown (2 no, northeast), 1968-1969 The majority of the site is soft landscaping, church buildings (southeast) and residential flats (northwest) remain, 1981-present Off site Historical building plans list numerous fuel related tanks in eastern direction (closest located 2m east), 1942-1960 Tanks contents unknown (closest located 10m west), 1967 Flour mill (15m east), 1950-1978 Timber yard (25m west), 1862-1895 Numerous electricity substations in eastern direction (closest located 30m east), 1966 Granary (35m west), 1862-1895 Timber yard (90m west), 1862-1895 Timber yard (160m east), 1862-1898 Hospital (210m south), 1898-1949 Foundry (250m southeast), 1882-1896 Pollution incidents to controlled waters Two incidents: Miscellaneous unknown, minor incident (232m north), within River Thames Miscellaneous unknown, minor incident (245 north), Olivers Wharf None None
Landfill sites Other waste sites
Appendix 9 Page 64
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Land quality Site considerations Registered radioactive substances Fuel stations/depots Contemporary trade directory entries Intermediate (both Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout), main tunnel drive, intermediate with connection tunnel drive None None Ten Power transmission services and equipment, active (40m east) Millinery manufactures and wholesalers, inactive (100m east) Ceramic manufacturers, supplies seven services, inactive (100m east) Furniture manufacturers, inactive (100m east) Fax machines, active (110m southeast) Office furniture and equipment, active (110m southeast) Office furniture and equipment, inactive (120m southeast) Cleaning services commercial, inactive (120m southeast) Ironing and laundry services, active (120m west) Launderette, inactive (220m southwest) Activity Potential site contaminants derived from surface sources (eg, contaminants in made ground) 1) Some potential for made ground from potential filling operations during development 2) Wharf operations (transport support and cargo Distance and direction to site 1) On site and directly adjacent to site 2) On site and directly adjacent to site Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH 2) Metals, TPH, PAHs, asbestos 3) Metals, TPH, PAHs
Site classification based on above information
Appendix 9 Page 65
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Land quality Site considerations Intermediate (both Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout), main tunnel drive, intermediate with connection tunnel drive handling) 3) On site 4) Metals, TPH, PAHs 3) Engineering works 4) Fuel tanks 5) Gas use 6) Electrical substation Potential site contaminants derived from offsite sources and transported to site Potential contamination pathways to site (Conceptual Site Model)3 Contamination category 1) Fuel tanks 2) Tanks contents unknown Source 1: A1, A2, A3, B4, C5 Source 2: D6, E1, F7 Category 2 assessed as medium risk 1) 2m east 2) 10m west 1) TPH, Metals, PAHs 2) TPH, Metals, PAHs, solvents 4) On site 5) On site 6) On site 5) Metals, TPH, PAHs 6) PCBs
Summary: The site is considered suitable for use as an intermediate (Option 1 northern layout), intermediate with connection tunnel drive or main tunnel drive site based on the low potential for contamination of the site to have occurred. The site is currently landscaped for use as playground/gardens and historically, it has not been developed for industrial use. The proposed shaft is not located near any of the potential contaminants identified. The site is considered less suitable for use as an intermediate shaft (Option 2 southern site layout) based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from the historic engineering works which are located at the proposed shaft site, the fuel tanks and wharf operations in the northern region of the site and the above-ground fuel tanks located in
Appendix 9 Page 66
Site suitability report S54SK Appendix 9 Land quality Site considerations Intermediate (both Option 1 northern layout and Option 2 southern layout), main tunnel drive, intermediate with connection tunnel drive
the vicinity of the site. The site potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways, as well as ground gas risks. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer, and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport. There is a potential for unexploded ordnance to be present on site as historical information indicates that nearby areas have been cleared of ordnance. It would therefore be prudent for a UXO survey (or equivalent) to be conducted at the site if not done so already. Notes: 1. From BGS Geological Model, giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river. 2. Soil information for urban areas is based on fewer observations than elsewhere in the country. Therefore, a worst case vulnerability (H) is assumed until proven otherwise. 3. Refer to schematic Conceptual Site Model for explanation of site-specific source-pathway-receptors
Appendix 9 Page 67
Contacts
For information about the Thames Tideway Tunnel Call: 0800 0721 086 Lines are open 24 hours a day Visit: www.thamestidewaytunnel.co.uk Email: info@tidewaytunnels.co.uk For our language interpretation service call 0800 0721 086
For information in Braille or large print call 0800 0721 086

For information about acceptance of our application and the examination process please contact the Planning Inspectorate. Call: 0303 444 5000 Visit: http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk

Site Suitability Report S54SK: King's Stairs Gardens

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Site Suitability Report S54SK: King's Stairs Gardens

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Autumn 2011

Site suitability report S54SK

110-RG-PNC-S54SK-000629 | Autumn 2011

Site suitability report S54SK

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Thames Tunnel Site suitability report S54SK

Site information ................................................................................................ 2 2.1 2.2

Engineering assessment ................................................................................. 7 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

Planning assessment ...................................................................................... 9 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Socio-economic and community assessment............................................. 18

Property assessment ..................................................................................... 22

Site conclusions by discipline ...................................................................... 25

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

TLRN TPA UDP UXO

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK

Introduction Purpose and structure of the report

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site information Site and surroundings

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Proposed use of site construction phase

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Main tunnel drive site

6 to 7 years 24 hours Mon to Sun

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Main tunnel drive site

Proposed use of site operational phase Introduction

4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Restoration and after-use

Engineering assessment Access

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK

Construction works considerations

Permanent works considerations

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK

Health and safety

Planning assessment Introduction

Planning applications and permissions

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Environmental appraisal Introduction

Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment Option 2 (southern site layout)

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Main tunnel drive site assessment

Main tunnel reception/intermediate with connection tunnel drive site assessment

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment Option 2 (south)

Ecology Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment (both options)

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK

Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment Option 2 (southern site layout)

Site suitability report S54SK King's Stairs Gardens

Site suitability report S54SK

Main tunnel reception/intermediate site assessment (southern site layout)